Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Rothman 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.

$25k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What you fund
0187% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202024.

Health$75kReligion$36kArts & Culture$29kEducation$2kPhilanthropy$500Food & Nutrition$380Other$0
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k7 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
$1,250
Median grant
1
States reached
$77k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MT SINAI MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION$15,000
TALMUDIC UNIVERSITY$5,300
FRIENDS OF LUBAVITCH$2,500
LUBAVITCH EDUCATIONAL CENTER$1,250
MIAMI BEACH COMMUNITY KOLLEL$250
Individual grant recipient$180
HELPING HANDS FOOD CO OP$100
SHABBAT SHALOM FAX OF LIFE INC$100
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 (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%HOBART & WILLIAM SMITH COLLEGES: $180 → 10%CHABAD OF N BRWDSO PB: $360 → 13%HOLOCAUST MUSEUM: $180 → 15%FRIENDS OF LUBAVITCH: $10k → 15%FRIENDS OF LUBAVITCH: $7k → 15%FRIENDS OF LUBAVITCH: $7k → 15%FRIENDS OF LUBAVITCH: $3k → 15%FRIENDS OF LUBAVITCH: $3k → 15%JEWISH FEDERATION: $500 → 15%YESHIVA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $1k → 15%YESHIVA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $360 → 15%MT SINAI MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $15k → 15%MOUNT SINAI MED CTR FOUNDATION: $15k → 15%MT SINAI MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $15k → 15%MT SINAI MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $15k → 15%MT SINAI MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $15k → 15%TALMUDIC UNIVERSITY: $9k → 15%TALMUDIC UNIVERSITY: $8k → 15%TALMUDIC UNIVERSITY: $5k → 15%TALMUDIC UNIVERSITY: $5k → 15%TALMUDIC UNIVERSITY: $5k → 15%MIAMI BEACH KOLLEL: $2k → 15%MIAMI BEACH KOLLEL: $1k → 15%GREATER MIAMI JEWISH: $500 → 15%MIAMI BEACH COMMUNITY KOLLEL: $250 → 15%MIAMI BEACH COMMUNITY KOLLEL: $250 → 15%CHABAD LUBAVITCH LAKEVIEW: $180 → 15%CHABAD LUBAVITCH LAKEVIEW: $180 → 15%SHABBAT SHALOM FAX OF LIFE INC: $100 → 15%YESHIVA TORAS CHAIM OF GREATER MIAMI: $18 → 15%CHABAD OF UNIV OF MIAMI: $72 → 15%SHABBAT SHALOM FAX OF LIFE INC: $100 → 15%HELPING HANDS FOOD CO OP: $180 → 15%CHABAD JEWISH CENTER OF DORAL: $180 → 15%HELPING HANDS FOOD CO OP: $100 → 15%CHABAD JEWISH CENTER OF DORAL: $180 → 15%HELPING HANDS FOOD CO OP: $100 → 15%LUBAVITCH EDUCATIONAL CENTER: $1k → 15%LUBAVITCH EDUCATIONAL CENTER: $1k → 15%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.

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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$129k · 11 repeat orgs$17k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
8

Total granted

$129k
$17k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
+74%

Still filing today

27%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EducationHealthInternationalOther

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

  • MS
    MOUNT SINAI MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION
    4× · 2021–2024 · $60k · revenue +36%
  • YE
    YESHIVA ELEMENTARY INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $1k · revenue +57%
  • SS
    SHABBOT SHALOM FAX OF LIFE INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $200 · revenue +2%

Funded once

  • MS
    MOUNT SINAI MED CTR FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $15k
  • JF
    JEWISH FEDERATION
    one grant, 2022 · $500
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $500

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

04Your field
04the grantee network

5 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 5 of the 19 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
5/5
Grantees still filing
4/5
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

TALMUDIC UNIVERSITY — $32,193 · OtherTALMUDIC UNIVERSITYFRIENDS OF LUBAVITCH — $28,720 · OtherFRIENDS OF LUBAVITCHMOUNT SINAI MED CTR FOUNDATION — $15,000 · OtherMOUNT SINAI MED CTR FOUNDATION+11 more — $8,212 · Other+11 moreMOUNT SINAI MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION — $60,000 · HealthMOUNT SINAI MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATIONYESHIVA ELEMENTARY INC — $1,360 · EducationHOBART AND WILLIAM SMITH COLLEGES — $180 · Education+1 more — $18 · EducationSHABBOT SHALOM FAX OF LIFE INC — $200 · International
Other$84,125Health$60,000Education$1,558International$200

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetMOUNT SINAI MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION — $60,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA ELEMENTARY INC — $1,360 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSHABBOT SHALOM FAX OF LIFE INC — $200 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetHOBART AND WILLIAM SMITH COLLEGES — $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA TORAS CHAIM OF GREATER MIAMI INC — $18 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

  • Who funds MOUNT SINAI MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION
  • Who funds YESHIVA ELEMENTARY INC
  • Who funds SHABBOT SHALOM FAX OF LIFE INC
  • Who funds HOBART AND WILLIAM SMITH COLLEGES
  • Who funds YESHIVA TORAS CHAIM OF GREATER MIAMI 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.

Jewish Communal FundNY16.2× affinity6 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Greater Miami Jewish Federation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · 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 Rothman 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2023
202122232425
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 0%
  • Yeshiva Elementary Inc0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
typical government reliance, FY2025

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 19 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph