Skip to content
Debra Simon Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Debra Simon Family 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.

$45k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$30k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Health$555kEducation$55kCivil Rights$7kHuman Services$4kPublic Safety & Disaster$3kPublic Benefit$3kInternational$2kReligion$715Other$0
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$30,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HACKENSACK UNIV MED CTR FOUNDATION$30,000
GLOBAL WELLNESS INSTITUTE$15,000
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 (FY17–21, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%COMFORT ZONE CAMP: $2k → 9%COMFORT ZONE CAMP: $1k → 9%PONY POWER THERAPIES: $1k → 7%PONY POWER THERAPIES: $350 → 7%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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$566k · 11 repeat orgs$62k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +20% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
15

Total granted

$566k
$62k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+20%
0%

Still filing today

64%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementPublic Safety & DisasterCivil RightsReligionOther
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

  • GW
    GLOBAL WELLNESS INSTITUTE INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $135k · revenue +1%
  • CZ
    COMFORT ZONE CAMP INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $3k · revenue +68%
  • GE
    GLOBAL EMPOWERMENT MISSION INC
    2× · 2020–2022 · $2k · revenue +674%

Funded once

  • CF
    CAREITY FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $15k · revenue -41%
  • SR
    SADDLE RIVER REFORMED CHURCH
    one grant, 2020 · $15k
  • US
    UPPER SADDLE RIVER EDUCATIONAL FOUN
    one grant, 2019 · $12k
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
We Beat Cancer
Philanthropy
2
Girl Effect Inc

Girl effect works for a future in which every girl is in control of her body, her health, her learning and her livelihood. we work across africa and asia with adolescent girls and young women using the power of media and technology to…

Youth Development
3
MRIGlobal

To improve the lives of people through innovative scientific and engineering research.

Science & Tech
4
Bionj Inc

Bionj, inc. is a powerful network of 400 member companies representing research-based life sciences companies and stakeholders. because patients can't wait, we are dedicated to propelling the rich innovation ecosystem in the new jersey…

—
5
New Jersey Emergency Medical Services Ta

Provision of emergency medical services response.

Public Safety & Disaster
6
United Suicide Survivors International Inc

Our mission is to cultivate the lived expertise of people who are suicide loss survivors, attempt survivors, thought survivors and caregivers into action through leadership, collaboration and advocacy. we offer webinars, storytelling…

Health
7
Crisis Text Line Inc

By leveraging innovative technology and research, we are shaping mental health policy and systems to create a world where everyone has access to the support they need anytime, anywhere.

Health
8
Grey Team Inc

Grey Team, Inc. is a 501 (c)3 non-profit based in Boca Raton, Florida established in November of 2016 to help reduce and eliminate PTSD related veteran suicides.Our mission is to save veterans lives. As suicide rates among returning US…

—
9
New York Road Runners Inc

As a new york city based nonprofit, we're dedicated to transforming the health and well-being of our communities through inclusive and accessible running experiences, empowering all to achieve their potential.

—
10
North Shore-Lij Occupational Medicine Pc

North shore-lij occupational medicine, pc is part of northwell health, inc. ("northwell"), which strives to improve the health of the communities it serves and is committed to providing the highest quality clinical care; educating the…

Health
11
Wespark Inc

Wespark is dedicated to enhancing the quality of life for cancer patients, survivors and their loved ones by providing free services that alleviate the physical & emotional side effects of a cancer diagnosis.

Human Services
12
World Child Cancer Usa

To improve cancer diagnosis, treatment and care for children across the developing world

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is We the Protesters Inc; the most unlike its peers is Global Wellness 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

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 26 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/14
Grantees still filing
8/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HACKENSACK UNIV MED CTR FOUNDATION: $374,500 · OtherHACKENSACK UNIV MED CTR FOUNDATIONDON BOSCO PREPARATORY HIGH SCHOOL INC: $26,500 · OtherDON BOSCO PREPARATORY HIGH SCHOOL INCUSR EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $16,000 · Other+12 more: $47,315 · Other+12 moreGLOBAL WELLNESS INSTITUTE INC: $135,000 · Community ImprovementGLOBAL WELLNESS INSTITUT…CAREITY FOUNDATION: $15,000 · HealthLUPUS RESEARCH ALLIANCE INC: $4,000 · HealthEvolve Pink Inc: $1,000 · Health+2 more: $1,200 · HealthCOMFORT ZONE CAMP INC: $3,400 · Human ServicesPONY POWER THERAPIES INC: $1,350 · Human ServicesGLOBAL EMPOWERMENT MISSION INC: $2,025 · Public Safety & DisasterWE THE PROTESTERS INC: $1,000 · Civil RightsCONTACT WE CARE INC: $250 · Religion
Other$464,315Community Improvement$135,000Health$21,200Human Services$4,750Public Safety & Disaster$2,025Civil Rights$1,000Religion$250

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 budgetGLOBAL WELLNESS INSTITUTE INC: $135,000 over 9y, 4.1% of budgetCAREITY FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetLUPUS RESEARCH ALLIANCE INC: $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCOMFORT ZONE CAMP INC: $3,400 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetGLOBAL EMPOWERMENT MISSION INC: $2,025 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPONY POWER THERAPIES INC: $1,350 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWE THE PROTESTERS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUPPER SADDLE RIVER PTO INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMANASQUAN FIRST AID SQUAD: $700 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS NEW JERSEY INC: $600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetUSRA COALITION A NJ NONPROFIT CORP: $500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetES BATTLE BUDDIES INC: $500 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCONTACT WE CARE INC: $250 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.

  • Who funds GLOBAL WELLNESS INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds CAREITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds LUPUS RESEARCH ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds COMFORT ZONE CAMP INC ↗
  • Who funds GLOBAL EMPOWERMENT MISSION INC ↗
  • Who funds PONY POWER THERAPIES INC ↗
  • Who funds WE THE PROTESTERS INC ↗
  • Who funds UPPER SADDLE RIVER PTO INC ↗
  • Who funds Evolve Pink Inc ↗
  • Who funds MANASQUAN FIRST AID SQUAD ↗
  • Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS NEW JERSEY INC ↗
  • Who funds USRA COALITION A NJ NONPROFIT CORP ↗
  • Who funds ES BATTLE BUDDIES INC ↗
  • Who funds CONTACT WE CARE INC ↗

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.

Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA3.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Debra Simon Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Debra Simon Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 78%
  • Usra Coalition a Nj Nonprofit Corp: 78% of income from government
  • Global Empowerment Mission Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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 26 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 Debra Simon Family’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