· Private foundation
Wood Kalb Foundation
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k8 grants · $30k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $58k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NECHUNG FOUNDATION | $21,600 |
| HOOPS 4 HOPE | $14,000 |
| SHANG SHUNG INSTITUTE OF AMERICA INC | $12,000 |
| THE HOFFMAN INSTITUTE FOUNDATION | $10,800 |
| ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS WORLD SERVICES INC | $5,000 |
| EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE | $5,000 |
| FRIENDS OF GEORGICA POND | $5,000 |
| JUSTICE FOR KEITH LAMAR | $4,000 |
| YOGA SOCIETY OF NEW YORK ANANDA ASHRAM | $3,000 |
| AID | $3,000 |
| ARTS CENTER AT DUCK CREEK | $3,000 |
| BRIDGEHAMPTON CHILD CARE INC | $2,000 |
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 (FY18–23, $12k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 11% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +34% since the first grant, against +6% for the ones you funded once.
25 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2025, 16 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $18k 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
- NFNECHUNG FOUNDATION INC8× · 2017–2025 · $58k · revenue +258% · 44% of their budget
- AAALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS WORLD SERVICES INC5× · 2019–2025 · $21k · revenue +31%
BARD COLLEGE2× · 2018–2019 · $7k · revenue +245%
Funded once
- POPOINTING OUT THE GREAT WAY FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue +91%
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $9k · revenue +102%- PFPEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $4k · revenue +129%
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.
At Hope for China Dogs, we are committed to combating the cruel and inhumane practice of the dog meat trade in China. We believe that every dog deserves to live a life free from pain and suffering, and we are dedicated to rescuing and…
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.…
Our vision is a world where humans treat animals with respect, empathy and understanding. four paws mission is to be the strong, global and independent voice for animals.
HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…
The Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) is the only civil rights organization in The United States dedicated solely to securing fundamental rights for nonhuman animals and the leading force in building a national and global nonhuman rights…
Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes. nyu's primary missions are education, research and scholarship, and patient care.
To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.
Women's rights without frontiers, international ("wrwf- or "the organization") is a nonprofit entity supporting the rights of women and girls, first in china, then in other countries' communities. the organization was founded by regina…
Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…
World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…
We rescue cats and dogs suffered on the street and in endangered locations in both new york and china. the mission of our no-kill shelter is to provide stray cats with safe haven and veterinary care before placing them in forever loving…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is God's Love We Deliver Inc and the most unlike its peers is Shang Shung Institute in America Inc. 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 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
40 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. 40 of the 52 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 NECHUNG FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SHANG SHUNG INSTITUTE IN AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS WORLD SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds JUSTICE FOR KEITH LAMAR INC ↗
- Who funds HOFFMAN INSTITUTE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Bridgehampton Child Care and Recreational Center Inc ↗
- Who funds POINTING OUT THE GREAT WAY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ASSOCIATION FOR INDIAS DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
- Who funds THE CALHOUN SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds BARD COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds ARTS CENTER AT DUCK CREEK INC ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds TIBET HOUSE US INC ↗
- Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds GENTLE GIANTS DRAFT HORSE RESCUE SOCIETY LTD ↗
- Who funds Physicians Committee for Responsible Med ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS INC ↗
- Who funds REPRIEVE (US) ↗
- Who funds NORTHEAST BOSTON TERRIER RESCUE INC ↗
- Who funds International Schools of East-West Unity (Gurukula) Inc ↗
- Who funds EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM FOR RECOVERED ALCOHOLICS INC ↗
- Who funds EAST HAMPTON MEALS ON WHEELS INC ↗
- Who funds WAINSCOTT SEWING SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds CITYMEALS-ON-WHEELS ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK FOR NEW YORK CITY ↗
- Who funds KIRTAN WALLAH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL 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.
Open a dossier: The Jm Kaplan Fund Inc · Boston Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · Tides Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Verizon Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · American Endowment 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 Wood Kalb 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.
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 Wood Kalb Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Wood Kalb 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.