Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Rothenberg Ludden Trust

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.

$100k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
0195% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.

Environment$1.0MAnimals$181kRecreation & Sports$30kCommunity Improvement$15kScience & Tech$10kHealth$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $45k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$907k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY$50,000
THE GREENBURGH NATURE CENTER$25,000
BRONX IS BLOOMING$10,000
UNTERMYER GARDEN CONSERVANCY$10,000
STERN CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE BUSINES$5,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 53% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 14%THE GREENBURGH NATURE CENTER: $95k → 9%NATIONAL RESOURCES DEFENSE: $5k → 17%350ORG: $5k → 20%BRONX IS BLOOMING: $10k → 28%SAVE THE SOUND: $5k → 12%FORESTRY SCHOLARSHIP COUNCIL: $10k → 9%RAINFOREST TRUST: $10k → 6%THE GREENBURG NATURE CENTER: $73k → 9%NATIONAL RESOURCES DEFENSE: $5k → 17%350ORG: $5k → 20%NEW YORK BOTANICAL GARDEN: $10k → 28%RAINFOREST TRUST: $5k → 6%THE GREENBURG NATURE CENTER: $72k → 9%NATIONAL RESOURCES DEFENSE: $5k → 17%NEW YORK BOTANICAL GARDEN: $10k → 28%THE GREENBURGH NATURE CENTER: $70k → 9%RAINFOREST ALLIANCE: $90k → 17%NEW YORK BOTANICAL GARDEN: $10k → 28%THE GREENBURGH NATURE CENTER: $60k → 9%RAINFOREST ALLIANCE: $52k → 17%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $50k → 28%THE GREENBURG NATURE CENTER: $50k → 9%RAINFOREST ALLIANCE: $51k → 17%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $50k → 28%THE GREENBURGH NATURE CENTER: $25k → 9%RAINFOREST ALLIANCE: $50k → 17%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $25k → 28%THE GREENBURGH NATURE CENTER: $25k → 9%RAINFOREST ALLIANCE: $50k → 17%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $25k → 28%WESTCHESTER LAND TRUST: $8k → 9%RAINFOREST ALLIANCE: $50k → 17%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $25k → 28%WESTCHESTER LAND TRUST: $5k → 9%RAINFOREST ALLIANCE: $40k → 17%WESTCHESTER LAND TRUST: $5k → 9%RAINFOREST ALLIANCE: $10k → 17%TEATOWN: $10k → 9%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $10k → 17%RIVERKEEPER: $10k → 9%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $5k → 17%RIVERKEEPER: $5k → 9%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $5k → 17%RIVERKEEPER: $5k → 9%STERN CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE BUSINES: $5k → 17%TEATOWN: $5k → 9%UNTERMYER GARDEN CONSERVANCY: $20k → 9%UNTERMYER GARDEN CONSERVANCY: $10k → 9%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

WA
MN
NY
CT
VA
AZ
DC
FL

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.2M · 13 repeat orgs$59k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +31% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.

13 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
8

Total granted

$1.2M
$44k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
0%

Still filing today

69%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentAnimalsInternationalRecreation & SportsOther

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

  • RA
    RAINFOREST ALLIANCE INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $393k · revenue +157%
  • NL
    NUNATAKS LTD D/B/A GREENBURGH NATURE CENTER
    5× · 2021–2025 · $275k · revenue +17%
  • WC
    Wildlife Conservation Society
    5× · 2020–2025 · $175k · revenue +57%

Funded once

  • CF
    CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIV
    one grant, 2024 · $10k
  • FS
    FORESTRY SCHOLARSHIP COUNCIL
    one grant, 2024 · $10k
  • TN
    THE NATIVE PLANT CENTER
    one grant, 2021 · $5k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
2
New Jersey Conservation Foundation

Recognizing that a healthy environment is critical to the well-being and survival of all living things, new jersey conservation foundation is devoted to preserving land and protecting natural resources throughout new jersey's (continued on…

Environment
3
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
4
Environment Now
—
5
Rainforest Alliance Holding Inc

RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.

Environment
6
Rainforest Foundation Inc

The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.

Environment
7
Endangered Species International

Endangered Species International is strongly committed to reversing the trend of human-induced species extinction, saving endangered animals, and preserving wild places.

Animals
8
Natural Resources Defense Council Inc

We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…

Environment
9
Washington Forest Law Center

Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.

—
10
Wildlife Alliance Inc

Wildlife alliance is the leader in direct protection of forests and wildlife in tropical asia. our mission is to combat deforestation, biodiversity loss, climate change, and poverty by partnering with local communities and governments.…

Animals
11
Wild Landscapes Inc

Wild landscapes, inc. (wli) is dedicated to conserving large and connected landscapes globally significant to wildlife and crucial to local communities. our environmental conservation strategy is to empower communities, conservationists,…

Animals
12
American Museum of Natural History

The museum's mission statement is: "to discover, interpret, and disseminate - through scientific research and education - knowledge about human cultures, the natural world, and the universe."

Arts & Culture

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rainforest Trust and the most unlike its peers is Untermyer Gardens Conservancy Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

04the grantee network

16 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. 16 of the 24 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
13/16
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

RAINFOREST ALLIANCE INC — $392,500 · OtherRAINFOREST ALLIANCE INCTHE GREENBURG NATURE CENTER — $194,366 · OtherTHE GREENBURG NATURE CENTER+9 more — $87,500 · Other+9 moreNUNATAKS LTD D/B/A GREENBURGH NATURE CENTER — $275,000 · EnvironmentNUNATAKS LTD D/B/A GREENBURGH NAT…NEW YORK BOTANICAL GARDEN — $30,000 · EnvironmentNEW YORK BOTANICAL GARDENRIVERKEEPER INC — $20,000 · EnvironmentRIVERKEEPER INCWestchester Land Trust Inc — $18,000 · Environment+4 more — $30,000 · Environment+4 moreWildlife Conservation Society — $175,000 · AnimalsWildlife Conserv…+2 more — $6,000 · AnimalsUNTERMYER GARDENS CONSERVANCY INC — $30,000 · Recreation & SportsRAINFOREST TRUST — $17,000 · International
Other$674,366Environment$373,000Animals$181,000Recreation & Sports$30,000International$17,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetRAINFOREST ALLIANCE INC — $392,500 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetNUNATAKS LTD D/B/A GREENBURGH NATURE CENTER — $275,000 over 5y, 5.5% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society — $175,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetUNTERMYER GARDENS CONSERVANCY INC — $30,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetNEW YORK BOTANICAL GARDEN — $30,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetRIVERKEEPER INC — $20,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $20,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetWestchester Land Trust Inc — $18,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetRAINFOREST TRUST — $17,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budget350ORG — $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAVE THE SOUND — $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMELANOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION — $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSAVE THE CHIMPS INC — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization The Rothenberg Ludden Trust 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%3%6%10%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 37%
  • Save the Sound — 37% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 24 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home