· Private foundation
The Robert S Rifkind Charitable Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k6 grants · $20k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $55k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE SCHECHTER INSTITUTE | $50,000 |
| BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY | $20,000 |
| THE LOOMIS CHAFFEE SCHOOL | $15,000 |
| THE REPORTERS COMMITTEE FOR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS | $10,000 |
| SLIFKA CENTER FOR JEWISH LIFE | $10,000 |
| NEW ISRAEL FUND | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| HARVARD UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR JEWISH STUDIES | $5,000 |
| PECONIC LAND TRUST | $4,000 |
| GUCKER CAMPERSHIP FUND | $500 |
| LVIS | $500 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY21–23, $9k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +20% since the first grant, against +4% for the ones you funded once.
26 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 19 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 40% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $60k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as “new.” Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.
Backed again, and grew
- LBLEO BAECK INSTITUTE INC4× · 2018–2024 · $74k · revenue +140%
- ACAMERICAN COUNCIL OF LEARNED SOCIETIES6× · 2018–2023 · $73k · revenue +17%
- TLTHE LOOMIS INSTITUTE D/B/A THE LOOMIS CHAFFEE SCHOOL8× · 2018–2025 · $72k · revenue +20%
Funded once
- MSMarlboro School of Music Incone grant, 2021 · $13k · revenue -68%
- CFCENTER FOR CREATIVE CHANGEone grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue 0%
- UJUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INCgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +34%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
To organize pro-israel, pro-peace, pro-democracy americans to promote us policies that embody our deeply held jewish and democratic values and that help secure the state of israel as a democratic homeland for the jewish people.
The jewish electorate institute (jei) is an independent, non-partisan 501(c)(3) organization that surveys, interprets, reports, and educates the public about the perspectives, voting behaviors, and motivations of the american jewish…
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
The institute's mission, as set out in its certificate of incorporation, is to promote the clarification and simplification of the law and its better adaptation to social needs, to secure the better administration of justice, and to…
Promotes excellence in jewish learning & leadership within a pluralistic environment. see sch ohebrew college promotes excellence in jewish learning and leadership within a pluralistic environment of open inquiry, intellectual rigor,…
Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…
The mission of the jewish museum is to collect, preserve, exhibit and interpret art and jewish culture. see schedule o for more information.
To provide students with the knowledge, skills, ethical values needed for a career in law.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
Our mission has always been to enhance jewish literacy through the publication of great books.
The Knight First Amendment Institute defends the freedoms of speech and the press in the digital age through strategic litigation, research, public advocacy and public education. Our aim is to promote a system of free expression that is…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Council of Learned Societies and the most unlike its peers is University of Notre Dame du Lac. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 47 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
24 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 24 of the 44 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR JEWISH HISTORY INC ↗
- Who funds THE SCHECHTER INSTITUTES INC ↗
- Who funds LEO BAECK INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN COUNCIL OF LEARNED SOCIETIES ↗
- Who funds THE LOOMIS INSTITUTE D/B/A THE LOOMIS CHAFFEE SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds THE REPORTERS COMMITTEE FOR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS ↗
- Who funds BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds NEW ISRAEL FUND ↗
- Who funds PECONIC LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds Marlboro School of Music Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR CREATIVE CHANGE ↗
- Who funds University of Notre Dame du Lac ↗
- Who funds UNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF GEORGICA POND FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC ↗
- Who funds THE ELIHU CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds HIAS INC ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK PUBLIC RADIO ↗
- Who funds THE LADIES VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT SOCIETY OF EAST HAMPTON ↗
- Who funds 70 FACES MEDIA INC ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization The Robert S Rifkind Charitable Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Hias Inc — 88% of income from government
- Brandeis University — 9% of income from government
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending — grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Robert S Rifkind Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Robert S Rifkind Charitable Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.