· Private foundation
The Rothschild Family Charitable 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
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 51% of THE ROTHSCHILD FAMILY CHARITABLE FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k3 grants · $15k
- $10k–50k11 grants · $185k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL | $30,000 |
| FRIENDS OF THE HOSPITAL FOR SICK CHILDREN TORONTO INC | $20,000 |
| FIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE | $20,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA | $20,000 |
| AMERICAN INDIAN COLLEGE FUND | $20,000 |
| AMERICAN RIVERS | $20,000 |
| EARTHJUSTICE | $15,000 |
| FEEDING AMERICA | $10,000 |
| DHARMACHAKRA KADAMPA BUDDHIST CENTER | $10,000 |
| ALS NORTHWEST ASSOCIATION | $10,000 |
| WOOD RIVER LAND TRUST | $10,000 |
| A WALK ON WATER | $5,000 |
| AGAPE INTERNATIONAL SPIRITUAL CENTER | $5,000 |
| HOAG - WOMEN'S HEALTH INSTITUTE - NICU | $5,000 |
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 (FY19–20, $63k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 95% 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.
26 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2024, 18 since wound down; 6 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, 60% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $80k 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
- FOFRIENDS OF THE HOSPITAL FOR SICK CHILDREN TORONTO INC4× · 2021–2024 · $85k · revenue +597%
ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC6× · 2019–2024 · $80k · revenue +99%- WRWOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO4× · 2021–2024 · $70k · revenue +80%
Funded once
THE YOUNG CENTER FOR IMMIGRANT CHILDRENS RIGHTSgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $60k · revenue +177%- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $25k
THE BAIL PROJECT INCone grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue -85%
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.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
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.
The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.
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…
Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.
To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.
Rri's mission is to support local communities and indigenous peoples' struggles against poverty and marginalization by promoting greater global commitment and action towards policy, market, and legal reforms that secure their rights to…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ms Foundation for Women Inc and the most unlike its peers is Friends of Nelha. 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 31 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 — 2% 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.
47 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. 47 of the 62 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 FRIENDS OF THE HOSPITAL FOR SICK CHILDREN TORONTO INC ↗
- Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
- Who funds WOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO ↗
- Who funds THE YOUNG CENTER FOR IMMIGRANT CHILDRENS RIGHTS ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds SOL International Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds PROTECT OUR WINTERS ↗
- Who funds SAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds THE FOOD BASKET INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF NELHA ↗
- Who funds THE BAIL PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds ROUND VALLEY INDIAN HEALTH CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds BLAINE COUNTY HUNGER COALITION INC ↗
- Who funds OPERATION SMILE INC ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN INDIAN COLLEGE FUND ↗
- Who funds HEROIC HEARTS PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds FIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN RIVERS INC ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds CAROLINA ABORTION FUND ↗
- Who funds JUST KEEP LIVIN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR CARBON REMOVAL ↗
- Who funds COALITION FOR RAINFOREST NATIONS SECRETARIAT ↗
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: Network for Good · American Endowment Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Rothschild Family 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.
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% 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 Rothschild Family Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Rothschild Family 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.