· Private foundation
The Rosenthal Foundation
Its FY2024 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 placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $3k
- $250k+10 grants · $3.8M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Kate Belleman Donor Advised Fund | $376,629 |
| Jesse Rosenthal Donor Advised Fund | $376,629 |
| Elizabeth Rosenthal Donor Advised Fund | $376,629 |
| Amy Rosenthal Donor Advised Fund | $376,629 |
| Abigail Rosenthal Donor Advised Fund | $376,628 |
| Sarah Rosenthal Donor Advised Fund | $376,628 |
| Nancy Belleman Donor Advised Fund | $376,628 |
| Jean Rosenthal Donor Advised Fund | $376,628 |
| Jerry Rosenthanl Donor Advised Fund | $376,628 |
| Tom Rosenthal Donor Advised Fund | $376,628 |
| Casa Marianella | $3,157 |
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 (FY17–23, $275k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 58% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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 +34% since the first grant, against +32% for the ones you funded once.
32 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 31 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.8M 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
- GHGROWING HOME INC4× · 2018–2021 · $80k · revenue +112%
- FLFAMILY LIFELINE4× · 2017–2021 · $75k · revenue +12%
- MFMigrant Farmworkers Assistance Fund4× · 2017–2020 · $70k · revenue +14%
Funded once
- JFJewish Family Services Supporting Foundationgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue +82% · 28% of their budget
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2021 · $20k
- TATHE AIM CENTER INCgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $20k · revenue +167%
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 legal aid justice center partners with communities and clients to achieve justice by dismantling systems that create and perpetuate poverty.
Thrive dc works to prevent and end homelessness by providing vulnerable individuals with a comprehensive range of services to help stabilize their lives.
The ywca is dedicated to eliminating racism, empowering women, and promoting peace, justice, dignity, and freedom for all.
Provides person-centered and inclusive services to children and adults with and without disabilities that includes securing employment, connecting to necessary supportive services, accessing housing and participating fully as contributing…
Low-income housing.
VACIR is a multi-racial and multi-ethnic coalition of organizations that exists to win dignity, power and quality of life for all immigrant and refugee communities.
Home of va ensures equal access to housing opportunities by building individual capacity, ensuring compliance with fair housing laws, and promoting effective public policy to advance housing justice.
To deliver legal and social services to people and families who want to put down roots in the u.s. and cultivate welcoming communities that uphold our collective freedoms.
We partner with children and adults with disabilities and their families so they may live more meaningful, healthy, and independent lives in their homes and communities.
Our mission is to lead latina victims of domestic violence to safety, empower them to live free of violence and reach and sustain their full potential. we pursue our mission by raising community awareness, engaging in activism and…
To operate residential and non-residential programs for victims of domestic violence.
To protect housing and prevent eviction, offer services, rograms, and engage in other community activities that and support the success, health, and development of our community, emphasizing immigrants and refugees.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Way of Greater Richmond & Petersburg and the most unlike its peers is Riverkeeper Inc. 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 32 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.
38 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. 38 of the 58 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 Jewish Family Services Supporting Foundation ↗
- Who funds GROWING HOME INC ↗
- Who funds FAMILY LIFELINE ↗
- Who funds Migrant Farmworkers Assistance Fund ↗
- Who funds FUND TEXAS CHOICE ↗
- Who funds CARITAS ↗
- Who funds THE SETTLEMENT CLUB ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL GOOD FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE HAVEN AT FIRST AND MARKET INC ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR INTERFAITH MINISTRIES ↗
- Who funds URBAN JUSTICE CENTER ↗
- Who funds ROSE BROOKS CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds SAVE INC ↗
- Who funds KITE'S NEST INC ↗
- Who funds CASA MARIANELLA INC ↗
- Who funds AUSTIN YOUTH & COMMUNITY FARM INC DBA URBAN ROOTS ↗
- Who funds GREATER CHARLOTTESVILLE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC ↗
- Who funds RIVERKEEPER INC ↗
- Who funds RE-ESTABLISH RICHMOND INC ↗
- Who funds LA COCINA ↗
- Who funds CAMPS FOR KIDS ↗
- Who funds VIRGINIA ANTI-VIOLENCE PROJECT ↗
- Who funds HAPPILY NATURAL DAY ↗
- Who funds THE MAGGIE WALKER COMMUNITY LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds Shepherds Center of Kansas Cty Ctl ↗
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: Richmond Memorial Health Foundation · The Pauley Family Foundation · Virginia Nonprofit Housing Coalition · Dominion Energy Charitable Foundation · The Community Foundation Inc · Robins Foundation · The Jackson Foundation · Donald D Hammill Foundation · Bon Secours - Richmond Health System Inc · Tesco Foundation · Herndon Foundation · The Mary Morton Parsons 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 Rosenthal 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.
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 Rosenthal Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Rosenthal 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.