Skip to content

· Private foundation

Daniel Paul and Barbara Ann Horwitz 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.

$158k
Granted FY2025still arriving
20
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$56k
Largest
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

Education$337kArts & Culture$257kHealth$202kHuman Services$154kPhilanthropy$93kInternational$43kReligion$37kCivil Rights$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 20 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k15 grants · $48k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $55k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $56k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$525k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UCLA Foundation$56,250
The Masket Foundation$17,500
UC Regents Fund$17,000
The Washington Institute$10,000
Los Angeles Jewish Health$10,000
Los Angeles Philharmonic$8,816
American Friends of the Hebrew Univ$8,000
University Synagogue$5,085
Jewish Federation$5,000
The Guardians of the LA Jewish Home$5,000
Wallis Annenberg Center for the Per$2,518
Hammer Museum$2,500
Los Angeles County Museum of Art$2,500
Los Angeles Trade Tech$2,500
Opica Adult Day Care Center Inc$1,500
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 (FY18–25, $18k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Hope in a Suitcase: $5k → 14%Hope in a Suitcase: $1k → 14%AARP Foundation: $450 → 14%AARP Foundation: $300 → 14%AARP Foundation: $200 → 14%Opica Adult Day Care Center Inc: $4k → 14%Opica Adult Day Care Center Inc: $2k → 14%Opica Adult Day Care Center Inc: $2k → 14%Opica Adult Day Care Center Inc: $2k → 14%Opica Adult Day Care Center Inc: $1k → 14%Opica Adult Day Care Center Inc: $1k → 14%Opica Adult Day Care Center Inc: $1k → 14%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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$821k · 34 repeat orgs$79k to everyone else

34 repeat relationships: 15 still active in FY2025, 19 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

34
14

Total granted

$821k
$40k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+12%
+16%

Still filing today

47%
14%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 61% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $40k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureHuman ServicesHealthEducationInternationalOther
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

  • BT
    Beit T'Shuvah
    6× · 2019–2024 · $169k · revenue +26%
  • LA
    LOS ANGELES PHILHARMONIC ASSOCIATION
    6× · 2019–2025 · $110k · revenue +31%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF HEBREW UNIVERSITY INC
    4× · 2018–2025 · $26k · revenue +8%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $21k
  • TM
    The Music Center
    one grant, 2018 · $5k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $3k
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
Los Angeles Opera Company

To serve the public by producing world-class opera that preserves, promotes and advances the art form while embodying the diversity, spirit and artistic sensibility unique to los angeles. we envision an engaged and enlightened community in…

Arts & Culture
2
Academy of Television Arts and Sciences

The Television Academy is dedicated to celebrating excellence, innovation and the advancement of the telecommunications arts and sciences through recognition, education and leadership, while fostering a diverse, inclusive and accessible…

—
3
The American Institute of Architects California

The AIA California, in collaboration with local components, is the voice of the architectural profession.

—
4
Los Angeles Pacific University

Los angeles pacific university exists to deliver high quality, accessible christ-centered education to learners everywhere.

Education
5
Jewish Federation Council of Greater La

Based on jewish values, the jewish federation of greater los angeles convenes and leads the community and leverages its resources to assure the continuity of the jewish people, support a secure state of israel, care for jews in need here…

Philanthropy
6
Augustana College

Rooted in the liberal arts & sciences & lutheran expression of the christian faith, & is committed to offering a challenging education that develops qualities of mind, spirit, & body necessary for a rewarding life of leadership & service…

Education
7
University of New Haven

The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…

Education
8
Asian Art Museum Foundation of San Francisco

The asian art museum celebrates, preserves, and promotes asian and asian american art and cultures for local and global audiences. we provide a dynamic forum for exchanging ideas, inviting collaboration, and fueling imagination to deepen…

Arts & Culture
9
California Institute of Contemporary Art
—
10
Los Angeles Conservancy

The los angeles conservancy is a nonprofit membership organization that works through education and advocacy to recognize, preserve, and revitalize the historic architectural and cultural resources of los angeles county.

Arts & Culture
11
The Jewish Museum

The mission of the jewish museum is to collect, preserve, exhibit and interpret art and jewish culture. see schedule o for more information.

Arts & Culture
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ucla Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Whitney Museum of American Art. 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

20 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. 20 of the 54 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
14/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Beit T'Shuvah: $169,142 · OtherBeit T'ShuvahThere With Care: $115,000 · OtherThere With CareJewish Federation: $70,000 · OtherJewish FederationUNIVERSITY SYNAGOGUE: $37,145 · OtherUNIVERSITY SYNAGOGUEOtis College of Art: $36,850 · OtherOtis College of ArtThe Guardians of the LA Jewish Home: $25,000 · Other+30 more: $187,320 · Other+30 moreUCLA FOUNDATION: $383,225 · EducationUCLA FOUNDATIONHarmony Project: $14,000 · Education+1 more: $3,000 · EducationLOS ANGELES PHILHARMONIC ASSOCIATION: $110,256 · Arts & CultureLOS ANGELES P…American Friends of Israel Philharmonic Orchestra: $13,000 · Arts & CultureAmerican Frie…ARMAND HAMMER MUSEUM OF ART AND CULTURAL CENTER INC: $10,000 · Arts & CultureARMAND HAMMER…MUSEUM ASSOCIATES: $9,080 · Arts & CultureMUSEUM ASSOCI…MUSIC CENTER FOUNDATION: $5,200 · Arts & Culture+3 more: $6,070 · Arts & CultureWASHINGTON INSTITUTE FOR NEAR EAST POLICY: $30,000 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF HEBREW UNIVERSITY INC: $25,500 · InternationalSAINT JOHN'S HEALTH CENTER FOUNDATION: $20,000 · Health+1 more: $500 · HealthOPICA ADULT DAY PROGRAM & COUNSELING CENTER: $11,500 · Human ServicesHOPE IN A SUITCASE: $6,000 · Human ServicesAARP FOUNDATION: $950 · Human Services
Other$640,457Education$400,225Arts & Culture$153,606International$55,500Health$20,500Human Services$18,450

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 budgetUCLA FOUNDATION: $383,225 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetBeit T'Shuvah: $169,142 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetLOS ANGELES PHILHARMONIC ASSOCIATION: $110,256 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetWASHINGTON INSTITUTE FOR NEAR EAST POLICY: $30,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF HEBREW UNIVERSITY INC: $25,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetSAINT JOHN'S HEALTH CENTER FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHarmony Project: $14,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetAmerican Friends of Israel Philharmonic Orchestra: $13,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetOPICA ADULT DAY PROGRAM & COUNSELING CENTER: $11,500 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetARMAND HAMMER MUSEUM OF ART AND CULTURAL CENTER INC: $10,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMUSEUM ASSOCIATES: $9,080 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMUSIC CENTER FOUNDATION: $5,200 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetHILLEL AT UCLA: $5,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RADIO: $4,170 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN JEWISH UNIVERSITY: $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCRAFT CONTEMPORARY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAARP FOUNDATION: $950 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetWHITNEY MUSEUM OF AMERICAN ART: $900 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetVENICE FAMILY CLINIC: $500 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 UCLA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Beit T'Shuvah ↗
  • Who funds LOS ANGELES PHILHARMONIC ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds WASHINGTON INSTITUTE FOR NEAR EAST POLICY ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF HEBREW UNIVERSITY INC ↗
  • Who funds SAINT JOHN'S HEALTH CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Harmony Project ↗
  • Who funds American Friends of Israel Philharmonic Orchestra ↗
  • Who funds OPICA ADULT DAY PROGRAM & COUNSELING CENTER ↗
  • Who funds ARMAND HAMMER MUSEUM OF ART AND CULTURAL CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds MUSEUM ASSOCIATES ↗
  • Who funds HOPE IN A SUITCASE ↗
  • Who funds MUSIC CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds HILLEL AT UCLA ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RADIO ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH UNIVERSITY ↗

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.

California Community FoundationCA16.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: California Community Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · National Philanthropic Trust · 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 Daniel Paul and Barbara Ann Horwitz Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Daniel Paul and Barbara Ann Horwitz Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 54 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 Daniel Paul and Barbara Ann Horwitz’s filings →

    More from the funding graph