Skip to content
Amos and Ruth Wilnai Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Amos and Ruth Wilnai 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.

$617k
Granted FY2019
16
Grants FY2019
7
States reached
$330k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

65% of Amos and Ruth Wilnai Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Pef Israel Endowment Funds Inc, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 7 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2019, the last year Amos and Ruth Wilnai Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 5 organizations, $617k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

0
’17
0
’18
5
’19
0
’20
0
’21
0
’22
6
’23
7
’24
7
’25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0182% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

International$2.0MEducation$650kHuman Services$380kPhilanthropy$122kPublic Benefit$120kReligion$48kArts & Culture$12kHealth$6kOther$0
02FY2019 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 16 grants below total $565,740, the rows itemized in this filing. The $617,490 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $51,750 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2019

  • Under $10k10 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $52k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $170k
  • $250k+1 grant · $330k
$2,500
Median grant
7
States reached
$26M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Oshman Family Jewish Community Center (OFJCC)$330,000
Jewish Community Federation of San Diego$120,000
Direct Relief via Pledging$50,000
Good People Fund$25,000
KGED$15,000
P E F Israel Endowment Funds, Inc$11,500
AAMDS Int'l Foundation$5,000
Silicon Valley Jewish Film Festival$2,500
KDFC$2,000
Yiddish Book Center Amherst$1,000
The Matzeva Foundation$1,000
NAMI Santa Clara County$1,000
Gwat Haviva Educational Foundation$850
Jewish Funders Network$400
Czestochowa-Radomsko Area Research Group (CRARG)$250
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY23–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 93% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%YIDDISH BOOK CENTER: $2k → 12%OSHMAN FAMILY JCC: $1k → 8%KQED: $250 → 10%KDFC: $250 → 14%JEWISHGEN: $500 → 17%ISRAEL DEMOCRACY FUND: $80k → 14%CRARG: $3k → 15%GEMACH HARABBONIM: $3k → 14%THE GOOD PEOPLE FUND: $150k → 16%US FRIENDS OF THE VAN LEER JERUSALEM INSTITUTE: $100k → 7%YIDDISH BOOK CENTER: $2k → 12%OSHMAN FAMILY JCC: $1k → 8%KQED: $250 → 10%KDFC: $250 → 14%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY: $200k → 17%ISRAEL DEMOCRACY FUND: $40k → 14%CRARG: $3k → 15%LEV ZAHAV NFP: $2k → 14%US FRIENDS OF THE VAN LEER JERUSALEM INSTITUTE: $50k → 7%YIDDISH BOOK CENTER: $2k → 12%OSHMAN FAMILY JCC: $1k → 8%KQED: $250 → 10%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY: $200k → 17%VAN LEER JERUSALEM INSTITUTE: $40k → 7%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY: $100k → 17%PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS: $710k → 17%PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS: $540k → 17%PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS: $531k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
NY
MA
OH
NJ
CA
VA
DC
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.

63%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$962k · 9 repeat orgs$573k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2019, 7 since wound down; 17 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call). Read against FY2019, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
17

Total granted

$962k
$573k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+11%
+20%

Still filing today

78%
35%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’23’24’25
InternationalArts & CulturePhilanthropyHealthEducationOther
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

  • AF
    American Friends of Tel Aviv Univ
    3× · 2023–2025 · $500k · revenue +45%
  • THE GOOD PEOPLE FUND INC
    2× · 2019–2023 · $175k · revenue +83%
  • NY
    NATIONAL YIDDISH BOOK CENTER INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $5k · revenue +22%

Funded once

  • OF
    Oshman Family Jewish Community Center
    one grant, 2019 · $330k
  • JC
    Jewish Community Federation of San Diego
    one grant, 2019 · $120k
  • DR
    Direct Relief via Pledging
    one grant, 2019 · $50k
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
University of Judaism Foundation
—
2
The Jewish Agency for Israel

The jewish agency binds jews across ideologies and civilizations together in a worldwide jewish family with israel at its center. it provides the global framework for aliyah, ensures global jewish safety, strengthens jewish identity and…

—
3
The Steinhardt Foundation for Jewish Life Inc
Religion
4
Sherit Isroel
—
5
Jewish Life Foundation
—
6
The Keren Rachaim Fund
—
7
The Israel Innovation Fund Inc

Our vision is to reignite the zionist spirit and meet the needs of jewish civilization in the twenty-first century by connecting people around the world through the vibrancy and creativity of contemporary israeli culture.

Arts & Culture
8
Hebrew University of Jerusalem

To promote, encourage, aid and advance higher and secondary education, research and training in all branches of knowledge. as the standard bearer of excellence, the university strives to ensure and foster outstanding achievements in all…

Education
9
Eastern European Jewish Heritage Foundation
Philanthropy
10
Foundation for Conservative Judiasm of South Florida
—
11
American Friends of Ish El Rayahu

To promote, benefit, and support Jewish religious, charitable & educational activities in Israel and the USA.

Religion
12
Idf Memorial Foundation
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Funders Network; the most unlike its peers is Lev Zahav Nfp. 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

14 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. 14 of the 27 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)
14/14
Grantees still filing
10/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $1,792,500 · PhilanthropyPEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC+2 more: $2,400 · PhilanthropyOshman Family Jewish Community Center (OFJCC): $330,000 · OtherOshman Family Jewish Co…Jewish Community Federation of San Diego: $120,000 · OtherJewish Community Federa…Israel Democracy Fund: $120,000 · OtherIsrael Democracy FundDirect Relief via Pledging: $50,000 · OtherDirect Relief via Pledg…VAN LEER JERUSALEM INSTITUTE: $40,000 · OtherVAN LEER JERUSALEM INST…+11 more: $37,850 · Other+11 moreAmerican Friends of Tel Aviv Univ: $500,000 · InternationalAmerican Friends of Tel…THE GOOD PEOPLE FUND INC: $175,000 · InternationalTHE GOOD PEOPLE FUND IN…+1 more: $240 · InternationalUS FRIENDS OF THE VAN LEER JERUSALEM INSTITUTE: $150,000 · EducationNATIONAL YIDDISH BOOK CENTER INC: $4,500 · Arts & CultureSILICON VALLEY JEWISH FILM FESTIVAL: $2,500 · Arts & CultureKQED INC: $750 · Arts & CultureNAMI SANTA CLARA COUNTY: $1,000 · Health
Philanthropy$1,794,900Other$697,850International$675,240Education$150,000Arts & Culture$7,750Health$1,000

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 budgetPEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $1,792,500 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetAmerican Friends of Tel Aviv Univ: $500,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetTHE GOOD PEOPLE FUND INC: $175,000 over 2y, 5.0% of budgetUS FRIENDS OF THE VAN LEER JERUSALEM INSTITUTE: $150,000 over 2y, 10% of budgetIsrael Democracy Fund: $120,000 over 2y, 9.0% of budgetNATIONAL YIDDISH BOOK CENTER INC: $4,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetOSHMAN FAMILY JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSILICON VALLEY JEWISH FILM FESTIVAL: $2,500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetLev Zahav NFP: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNAMI SANTA CLARA COUNTY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetKQED INC: $750 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FUNDERS NETWORK: $400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF HEBREW UNIVERSITY INC: $240 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.

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 Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Philanthropic TrustPA8.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Amos and Ruth Wilnai Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Amos and Ruth Wilnai Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • National Yiddish Book Center Inc: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get 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 · 0–10%
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 27 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 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Amos and Ruth Wilnai’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