Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Steven & Carole Weinberg Founda

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.

$57k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it funds
0179% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Arts & Culture$74kAnimals$70kEducation$27kReligion$22kInternational$14kHealth$13kPhilanthropy$9kScience & Tech$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $37k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
$7,026
Median grant
3
States reached
$389k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
US HOLOCAUST FOUNDATION$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
JEWISH FEDERATION$7,200
ISRAEL AMERICAN COUNCIL$7,026
2KEHILLAT ISRAEL$7,000
STAND WITH US$7,000
SAN DIEGO ZOO$5,500
UC DAVIS$3,500
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY22–22, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Union Rescue Mission: $1k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

68%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$205k · 12 repeat orgs$97k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +34% since the first grant, against +8% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
15

Total granted

$205k
$59k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+34%
+8%

Still filing today

25%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 33% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $38k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureAnimalsHealthHuman ServicesFood & NutritionInternationalOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • TU
    The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
    6× · 2018–2023 · $64k · revenue +34%
  • ZS
    ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO
    4× · 2018–2021 · $54k · revenue +28%
  • SD
    SAN DIEGO JEWISH ACADEMY
    2× · 2020–2021 · $3k · revenue +38%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $11k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $10k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    2× · 2020–2021 · $7k
How this is measured

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

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
United States Naval Institute

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.

—
2
San Diego Municipal Employees Assn

The san diego municipal employees association (sdmea) is dedicated to being a strong and effective advocate for san diego city employees. sdmea is united to improve employees' standard of living and promote their fair treatment by…

—
3
Jewish Federation of San Diego County

Jewish federation of san diego county is dedicated to building a vibrant, caring, connected, and enduring jewish community.

—
4
California Dental Association

The california dental association is committed to the success of our members in service to their patients and the public.

Community Improvement
5
The San Diego Foundation

The san diego foundation inspires enduring philanthropy and enables community solutions to improve the quality of life in our region.

Philanthropy
6
Association of California School Administrators

The association serves its members by creating resources that enable california school administrators to develop and apply creative leadership and management skills and in turn, improve the educational process for all students.

—
7
California Dental Association Foundation

The foundation's mission is to improve the oral health of all californians by supporting the dental profession and its efforts to meet community needs.

Science & Tech
8
Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.

Education
9
United Way of San Diego County

To spark breakthrough community action that elevates every child and family toward a brighter future.

Philanthropy
10
California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy

To harness the power of the human immune system and advanced computing technologies to create and translate scientific discoveries into next generation vaccines and therapies for prevention, control and cure of chronic diseases, enabling…

Health
11
San Diego Opera Association

Mission: the mission of san diego opera is to deliver exceptional performances and exciting, accessible programs to diverse audiences, focusing on community partnerships, and the transformative and expressive power of the human voice. as…

Arts & Culture
12
Associated Students of San Diego State University

To support the social, recreational, cultural and education programs and facilities, both on campus and in the community, and to advocate for student interests, provide leadership opportunities and participate in shared governance.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Feeding San Diego; the most unlike its peers is The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. 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

9 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 33 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
8/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Various: $23,746 · OtherVariousSAN DIEGO ZOO: $15,500 · OtherSAN DIEGO ZOOIndividual grant recipient: $15,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $10,727 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $10,250 · OtherIndividual grant recipientUS HOLOCAUST FOUNDATION: $10,000 · OtherUS HOLOCAUST FOUNDATIONUC DAVIS: $10,000 · OtherUC DAVISJEWISH FEDERATION: $7,200 · OtherISRAEL AMERICAN COUNCIL: $7,026 · Other2KEHILLAT ISRAEL: $7,000 · OtherCongregation Bnai Israel: $6,951 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $6,724 · Other+13 more: $36,043 · Other+13 moreThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $64,363 · Arts & CultureThe United States Holoc…ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO: $54,167 · AnimalsZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY …UCLA FOUNDATION: $8,000 · EducationSAN DIEGO JEWISH ACADEMY: $3,000 · EducationISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE: $7,000 · InternationalCUREBOUND: $5,000 · HealthUNION RESCUE MISSION: $1,142 · Human ServicesFEEDING SAN DIEGO: $1,042 · Food & Nutrition
Other$166,167Arts & Culture$64,363Animals$54,167Education$11,000International$7,000Health$5,000Human Services$1,142Food & Nutrition$1,042

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $64,363 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO: $54,167 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUCLA FOUNDATION: $8,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetCUREBOUND: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSAN DIEGO JEWISH ACADEMY: $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetUNION RESCUE MISSION: $1,142 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFEEDING SAN DIEGO: $1,042 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ↗
  • Who funds ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO ↗
  • Who funds UCLA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds CUREBOUND ↗
  • Who funds SAN DIEGO JEWISH ACADEMY ↗
  • Who funds UNION RESCUE MISSION ↗
  • Who funds FEEDING SAN DIEGO ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

National Philanthropic TrustPA10.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Steven & Carole Weinberg Founda funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Steven & Carole Weinberg Founda. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 33 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

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

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Steven & Carole Weinberg Founda’s filings →

    More from the funding graph