Skip to content

· Private foundation

Chleck Family Foundation 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.

$2.4M
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$750k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Health$6.3MHuman Services$2.4MEducation$1.6MInternational$775kEmployment$100kReligion$95kPhilanthropy$50kArts & Culture$25k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $40k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $575k
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.8M
$150,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$55M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL$750,000
JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER$500,000
BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL$500,000
DANA FARBER INC$200,000
JUPITER MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION$150,000
JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER$100,000
THE AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BATSHEVA$75,000
PARK SCHOOL CORPORATION$50,000
MARIN PRIMARY AND MIDDLE$40,000
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 (FY24–24, $100k) land where the poverty rate runs at 5%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%MEANING FOUNDATION: $100k → 5%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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$10M · 11 repeat orgs$855k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +73% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
7

Total granted

$10M
$615k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+73%
0%

Still filing today

45%
43%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $240k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationHealthPhilanthropyInternationalHuman ServicesOther
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

  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc
    3× · 2019–2021 · $600k · revenue +97%
  • NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY
    3× · 2019–2021 · $525k · revenue +73%
  • JM
    Jupiter Medical Center Foundation Inc
    4× · 2019–2025 · $500k · revenue +109%

Funded once

  • JM
    Jupiter Medical Center Incgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $300k · revenue +30%
  • ME
    MISSION EDGE
    one grant, 2023 · $100k
  • MF
    Meaning Foundation
    one grant, 2024 · $100k · 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
Albert Einstein College of Medicine

Committed to exceptional healthcare quality for all and actively engaged with our community, einstein drives scientific discovery and educates compassionate leaders in health and science.

Education
2
Stony Brook Internists University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
3
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
4
Dana-Farber Cancer Care Network Inc

The mission of Dana-Farber Cancer Care Network (DFCCN) is to promote and support, directly or indirectly, the interests and purposes of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI).

Health
5
Metropolitan Jewish Health System Inc

Mjhs health system is a charitable not-for-profit established to support the activities of affiliated organizations. mjhs is built on the core values of compassion, dignity and respect, first established by the four brooklyn ladies in…

Health
6
The Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research

The feinstein institute for medical research ("the institute") is the research branch of northwell health ("northwell"). through its affiliation with northwell, the institute's mission is to bridge the gap between biomedical research and…

Health
7
Stony Brook Surgical Associates University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
8
Jupiter Medical Center Physicians Group Inc

JMCPG is committed to providing compassionate, personalized care from the region's most trusted team of physicians and health care professionals. Across the Palm Beaches and the Treasure Coast of Florida, JMCPG practice locations offer…

Health
9
University of Maryland Physicians Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

—
10
Stony Brook Urology University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
11
University of Maryland Oncology Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

Health
12
Neurology Associates of Stony Brook University Faculty Practice Corp

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Park School Corporation; the most unlike its peers is Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc. 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

11 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. 11 of the 21 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
6/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATED: $3,850,000 · OtherMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATEDJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $2,300,000 · OtherJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERMASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL: $850,000 · OtherMASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITALTHE AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BATSHEVA: $580,000 · OtherTHE AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BATSHEVAUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST: $550,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST+6 more: $520,000 · Other+6 moreNORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY: $525,000 · EducationNORTHEASTE…HEBREW COLLEGE: $400,000 · EducationHEBREW COL…PARK SCHOOL CORPORATION: $95,000 · EducationPARK SCHOO…MARIN PRIMARY & MIDDLE SCHOOL: $40,000 · EducationDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $600,000 · HealthJupiter Medical Center Inc: $300,000 · HealthJupiter Medical Center Foundation Inc: $500,000 · PhilanthropyPEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $125,000 · PhilanthropyMeaning Foundation: $100,000 · Human ServicesAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $20,000 · International
Other$8,650,000Education$1,060,000Health$900,000Philanthropy$625,000Human Services$100,000International$20,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $600,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY: $525,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetJupiter Medical Center Foundation Inc: $500,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetHEBREW COLLEGE: $400,000 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetJupiter Medical Center Inc: $300,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDANA-FARBER INC: $200,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $125,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMeaning Foundation: $100,000 over 1y, 6.2% of budgetPARK SCHOOL CORPORATION: $95,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMARIN PRIMARY & MIDDLE SCHOOL: $40,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $20,000 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 Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗
  • Who funds NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds Jupiter Medical Center Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds HEBREW COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds Jupiter Medical Center Inc ↗
  • Who funds DANA-FARBER INC ↗
  • Who funds PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC ↗
  • Who funds Meaning Foundation ↗
  • Who funds PARK SCHOOL CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds MARIN PRIMARY & MIDDLE SCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Chleck Family Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Chleck Family Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • Northeastern University: 7% of income from government
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: 7% of income from government
  • Jupiter Medical Center Inc: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
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 21 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 Chleck Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph