Skip to content
A and J Serenity Fund Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

A and J Serenity Fund Inc

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.

$303k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Youth Development$555kHuman Services$545kHousing & Shelter$380kEducation$130kArts & Culture$90kEmployment$55kFood & Nutrition$3k
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $3k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $50k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $250k
$50,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$5.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RUTH'S RUFUGE$50,000
NEW NEIGHBORS PARTNERSHIP$50,000
THE NEW YORK FOUNDLING$50,000
BROOKLYN BOOK BODEGA$50,000
THE DOOR$50,000
CARE FOR THE HOMELESS$40,000
GINA GIBNEY DANCE INC$10,000
NEW YORK COMMUNITY PANTRY$2,500
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 (FY20–25, $670k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 16%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 16%THE NEW YORK FOUNDLING: $50k → 17%THE NEW YORK FOUNDLING: $40k → 17%THE NEW YORK FOUNDLING: $30k → 17%EMMAS TORCH: $30k → 20%THE NEW YORK FOUNDLING: $30k → 17%EMMAS TORCH: $25k → 20%RUTH'S RUFUGE: $50k → 20%RUTH'S RUFUGE: $50k → 20%CARE FOR THE HOMELESS: $40k → 17%CARE FOR THE HOMELESS: $40k → 17%CARE FOR THE HOMELESS: $40k → 17%CARE FOR THE HOMELESS: $40k → 17%CARE FOR THE HOMELESS: $40k → 17%CARE FOR THE HOMELESS: $40k → 17%NEW NEIGHBORS PARTNERSHIP: $75k → 17%NEW NEIGHBORS PARTNERSHIP: $50k → 17%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 13 repeat orgs$63k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +16% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
1

Total granted

$1.7M
$50k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+16%
0%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesYouth DevelopmentArts & CultureRecreation & SportsHousing & ShelterEducationOther
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

  • CF
    CARE FOR THE HOMELESS
    6× · 2020–2025 · $240k · revenue +49%
  • TD
    THE DOOR - A CENTER OF ALTERNATIVES INC
    5× · 2020–2025 · $205k · revenue +36%
  • MC
    Mercy Center Inc
    5× · 2020–2024 · $170k · revenue +56%

Funded once

  • WC
    WOODLAWN CONSERVANCY INC
    one grant, 2024 · $50k · revenue 0%
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
The Neue Galerie New York
Arts & Culture
2
Hot Bread Kitchen Ltd

Hot bread kitchen creates economic opportunity through culinary job skills training and placement, food entrepreneurship, and an ecosystem of support for individuals who face barriers to meaningful careers.

Human Services
3
Under 21

Since 1972, under 21, d.b.a. covenant house new york (chny) has been working with one of new york city's most vulnerable populations - youth experiencing homelessness, age 16-24, and their dependent children. chny provides young people…

Human Services
4
Community Development Project Inc

Takeroot justice provides legal, participatory research and policy support to strengthen the work of grassroots and community-based groups in new york city to dismantle racial, economic and social oppression.

Community Improvement
5
Nontraditional Employment for Women

See schedule onontraditional employment for women (new) prepares, trains, and places women in careers in the skilled construction, utility, and maintenance trades, helping women achieve economic independence and a secure future.

Employment
6
New Women New Yorkers Inc

To provide workforce development and other programs to empower immigrant women to obtain meaningful employment or pursue higher education in nyc. to offer a safe, inclusive space where immigrant women can build community and share their…

Human Services
7
Leap Inc

Leap empowers low and moderate income people by helping them gain access to living-wage employment opportunities and career paths. we seek to develop programs that counter prevailing market inequalities and contribute to a broader movement…

Housing & Shelter
8
New York Apartment Association Inc

Nyaa provides services to landlords including computerized rent registration of rent stabilized apartments with the new york state division of housing and community renewal in compliance with nys & nyc laws & regulations.

—
9
Brooklyn Navy Yard Development Corp

To manage the brooklyn navy yard for the city of new york, specifically to expand job opportunities for new yorkers by fostering the development of small businesses.

Community Improvement
10
City Living Ny Inc

At city living ny, our mission is to empower youth aging out of foster care to successfully transition into adulthood. we start by providing clients with urgently needed items such as dishes and bedding to turn their apartment into a home.…

Human Services
11
New York Legal Assistance Group Inc

Please see schedule o for full mission statement

—
12
Women in Need Inc

To provide safe housing, critical services, and ground-breaking programs to help homeless women and their children rebuild their lives.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New York Foundling; the most unlike its peers is New Neighbors Partnership Association. 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

15 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. 15 of the 16 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
9/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CARE FOR THE HOMELESS: $240,000 · Human ServicesCARE FOR THE HOMELESSNEW YORK FOUNDLING: $150,000 · Human ServicesNEW YORK FOUNDLINGNEW NEIGHBORS PARTNERSHIP ASSOCIATION: $125,000 · Human ServicesNEW NEIGHBORS PARTNERSHIP ASSOCIATIONRUTH'S REFUGE INC: $100,000 · Human ServicesRUTH'S REFUGE INCEMMA'S TORCH LTD: $55,000 · Human ServicesEMMA'S TORCH LTDTHE COLLEGE AND COMMUNITY FELLOWSHIP INC: $140,000 · Youth DevelopmentTHE COLLEGE AND COMMUN…NEW CITY KIDS INC: $140,000 · Youth DevelopmentNEW CITY KIDS INCBROOKLYN BOOK BODEGA INC: $70,000 · Youth DevelopmentBROOKLYN BOOK BODEGA I…THE DOOR - A CENTER OF ALTERNATIVES INC: $205,000 · OtherTHE DOOR - A …+1 more: $2,500 · OtherMercy Center Inc: $170,000 · Recreation & SportsMercy Cent…Housing Rights Initiative: $140,000 · Housing & ShelterHousing R…ROCKING THE BOAT INC: $130,000 · EducationWOODLAWN CONSERVANCY INC: $50,000 · Arts & CultureRED BULL THEATER INC: $30,000 · Arts & CultureGINA GIBNEY DANCE INC: $10,000 · Arts & Culture
Human Services$670,000Youth Development$350,000Other$207,500Recreation & Sports$170,000Housing & Shelter$140,000Education$130,000Arts & Culture$90,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCARE FOR THE HOMELESS: $240,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetTHE DOOR - A CENTER OF ALTERNATIVES INC: $205,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetMercy Center Inc: $170,000 over 5y, 1.2% of budgetNEW YORK FOUNDLING: $150,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHousing Rights Initiative: $140,000 over 5y, 4.1% of budgetTHE COLLEGE AND COMMUNITY FELLOWSHIP INC: $140,000 over 4y, 2.1% of budgetNEW CITY KIDS INC: $140,000 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetROCKING THE BOAT INC: $130,000 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetNEW NEIGHBORS PARTNERSHIP ASSOCIATION: $125,000 over 2y, 15% of budgetRUTH'S REFUGE INC: $100,000 over 2y, 10% of budgetBROOKLYN BOOK BODEGA INC: $70,000 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetEMMA'S TORCH LTD: $55,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetWOODLAWN CONSERVANCY INC: $50,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetRED BULL THEATER INC: $30,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetGINA GIBNEY DANCE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

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.

The New York Communit…The Hyde and Watson F…The Ford FoundationLily Auchincloss Foun…Robin Hood FoundationVanguard Charitable E…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…American Online Givin…Morgan Stanley Global…The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
The New York Community TrustNY21.2× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The New York Community Trust · The Hyde and Watson Foundation · The Ford Foundation · Lily Auchincloss Foundation Inc · Robin Hood Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 A and J Serenity Fund Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from A and J Serenity Fund Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to A and J Serenity Fund Inc?

    Find your warmest path to A and J Serenity Fund 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.

    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 16 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 A and J Serenity’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home