· Private foundation
Weissman Family Foundation Inc
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.
The 57 grants below total $3,795,100 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $5,091,800 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $1,296,700 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2023
- Under $10k11 grants · $48k
- $10k–50k18 grants · $298k
- $50k–250k25 grants · $2.6M
- $250k+3 grants · $850k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Thousand Currents/CLIMA Fund | $300,000 |
| WATERKEEPER ALLIANCE | $300,000 |
| WESTON THEATER COMPANY | $250,000 |
| Fidelity Charitable Donor Advised Funds | $200,000 |
| Climate Emergency Fund | $150,000 |
| Union of Concerned Scientists | $150,000 |
| EarthJustice | $150,000 |
| Brooklyn Public Library | $100,000 |
| ACCESS REPRODUCTIVE CARE | $100,000 |
| Justice Through Empowerment Network | $100,000 |
| Nat'l Center for Science Educ | $100,000 |
| PEN America (Artists @ Risk) | $100,000 |
| PROTECT DEMOCRACY PROJECT | $100,000 |
| VOTO LATINO FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| Midwest Access Coalition | $100,000 |
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 (FY17–19, $191k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 92% 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.
123 repeat relationships — 46 still active in FY2023, 77 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (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 FY2023, 77% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $878k 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
EARTHJUSTICE5× · 2017–2023 · $600k · revenue +82%
THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC4× · 2017–2023 · $550k · revenue +12%
AMERICAN INDIAN COLLEGE FUND4× · 2017–2023 · $350k · revenue +198%
Funded once
- SASouth Arts Incone grant, 2022 · $250k · revenue -4%
- NANat'l Alliance of Abortion Fundsone grant, 2022 · $200k
- VLVOTO LATINO INCone grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue -30%
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.
Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
New york school of interior design provides the most innovative, immersive, and transformative interior design education in the world, demonstrating the impact of professionally designed interiors on the health, happiness, and well-being…
American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
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.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
Educational & charitable. to provide legal and scientific information to public interest attorneys and scientists in numerous countries.
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
The mission of the organization is to foster the development of creative individuals as writers and artists and to promote public appreciation of excellence in the literary and graphic arts by publishing a magazine containing fiction,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New York Cares Inc and the most unlike its peers is Norman Care Associations Vans. 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 37 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.9% lost their exemption, against 10% 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.
103 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. 103 of the 174 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 EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE EMERGENCY FUND ↗
- Who funds WATERKEEPER ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN INDIAN COLLEGE FUND ↗
- Who funds BROOKLYN PUBLIC LIBRARY ↗
- Who funds 350ORG ↗
- Who funds SHAKESPEARE IN DELAWARE PARK INC ↗
- Who funds South Arts Inc ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST ↗
- Who funds THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds MIDWEST ACCESS COALITION ↗
- Who funds THE PEOPLE'S FUND ↗
- Who funds LAWYERS FOR GOOD GOVERNMENT INC ↗
- Who funds RYE FREE READING ROOM ↗
- Who funds FUND FOR INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM INC ↗
- Who funds KARAM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HEALTHRIGHT INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds National Center for Science Education ↗
- Who funds VOTO LATINO INC ↗
- Who funds NORMAN CARE ASSOCIATIONS VANS ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds VOTO LATINO FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PROTECT DEMOCRACY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ALLIANCE TO END HOMELESSNESS ↗
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: Community Foundation for Greater Buffalo Inc · James H Cummings Foundation Inc · The Western New York Foundation · The Frank G Raichle Foundation · The New York Community Trust · The Hyde and Watson Foundation · The Ford Foundation · The John R Oishei Foundation · Children's Foundation of Erie County Inc · Cullen Foundation of Western New York Inc · The Cameron and Jane Baird Foundation · Rich Family 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 Weissman Family Foundation Inc 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.
- National Park Trust Inc — 51% of income from government
- Jacob's Pillow Dance Festival Inc — 1% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% 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 Weissman Family Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Weissman Family Foundation Inc 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.