Skip to content
Douek Family Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Douek Family Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$206k
Granted FY2024still arriving
27
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$48k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0176% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Religion$360kPhilanthropy$248kHealth$143kInternational$95kHuman Services$87kFood & Nutrition$22kRecreation & Sports$2kPublic Safety & Disaster$2kOther$0
02FY2024 · 27 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k18 grants · $28k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $179k
$1,809
Median grant
2
States reached
$3.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
YESHIVA OF FLATBUSH$48,000
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MIGDAL OHR$43,333
YESHIVAT MEKOR HAIM$19,000
CONGREGATION OHEL YISCHAK$16,677
CONGREGATION BETH TORAH$11,291
CHAI LIFELINE$10,427
SEPHARDIC FOOD FUND$10,000
BEIT YAAKOV OROT SARAH$10,000
JEWISH COMMUNAL FUND$10,000
HATZALAH$6,090
SPECIAL CHILDRENS CENTER$5,645
PEACE OF MIND FOUNDATION$2,600
SEPHARDIC BIKUR HOLIM$2,126
COLEL CHABAD$1,809
UJA FEDERATION OF NEW YORK$1,800
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 (FY17–24, $81k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%SPECIAL CHILDRENS CENTER: $51k → 11%SPECIAL CHILDRENS CENTER: $6k → 11%FRIENDSHIP CIRCLE: $100 → 6%SPECIAL CHILDREN'S CENTER: $3k → 11%Special Children's Center: $2k → 11%Special Children's Center: $634 → 11%SPECIAL CHILDRENS CENTER: $301 → 11%SEPHARDIC BIKUR HOLIM: $3k → 20%SEPHARDIC BIKUR HOLIM: $3k → 20%SEPHARDIC BIKUR HOLIM: $2k → 20%SEPHARDIC BIKUR HOLIM: $2k → 20%SEPHARDIC BIKUR HOLIM: $2k → 20%Sephardic Bikur Holim: $1k → 20%Sephardic Bikur Holim: $600 → 20%Moise Safra Community Center: $450 → 17%MIASKIM: $1k → 20%A TIME: $201 → 20%Miaskim: $180 → 20%MITZVAH MAN FOUNDATION: $2k → 20%MITZVAH MAN FOUNDATION: $1k → 20%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

NY
MA
NJ
VA
MD
TN
HI
FL
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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$765k · 32 repeat orgs$140k to everyone else

32 repeat relationships: 15 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

32
79

Total granted

$765k
$131k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+54%

Still filing today

41%
15%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesReligionYouth DevelopmentInternationalPhilanthropyHealthOther
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

  • CL
    CHAI LIFELINE INC
    7× · 2017–2024 · $132k · revenue +58%
  • TS
    THE SPECIAL CHILDREN CENTER
    6× · 2018–2024 · $63k · revenue +186%
  • TS
    THE SEPHARDIC FOOD FUND INC
    4× · 2017–2024 · $22k · revenue +65%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $51k
  • SO
    SYNAGOGUE OF DEAL
    one grant, 2023 · $26k
  • MH
    Mommoth Hospital
    one grant, 2020 · $4k
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 Steinhardt Foundation for Jewish Life Inc
Religion
2
University of Judaism Foundation
—
3
Tzemach Yifroch Foundation
—
4
Zichron Chaim Meir Foundation
Philanthropy
5
Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation
Philanthropy
6
The Bnai Jacob Foundation
—
7
The Keren Rachaim Fund
—
8
The Chasdei Shimon Foundation
Religion
9
Tal Hashamayim Foundation
Religion
10
Bnei Mordechai Charitable Foundation
Philanthropy
11
Chaim Maleh Foundation
Philanthropy
12
Meor Hachaim Foundation
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Moise Safra Community Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Dweck and Rahmey Family Foundation. 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

30 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. 30 of the 123 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
28/30
Grantees still filing
19/30
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

YESHIVAH OF FLATBUSH: $109,899 · OtherYESHIVAH OF FLATBUSHJewish Community Fund: $105,000 · OtherJewish Community FundCONGREGATION OHEL YISHAK INC: $78,052 · OtherCONGREGATION OHEL YISHAK INCIndividual grant recipient: $50,600 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCONGREGATION BETH TORAH: $47,214 · OtherCONGREGATION BETH TORAHYESHIVAT MEKOR HAIM: $29,000 · OtherSYNAGOGUE OF DEAL: $26,000 · OtherBEIT YAAKOV OROT SARAH: $20,000 · Other+95 more: $90,502 · Other+95 moreJEWISH COMMUNAL FUND: $135,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH COMMUNAL…+3 more: $6,126 · PhilanthropyCHAI LIFELINE INC: $131,591 · HealthCHAI LIFELINE …+1 more: $394 · HealthAmerican Friends of Migdal OHR: $86,966 · Youth DevelopmentAmerican …+2 more: $2,511 · Youth DevelopmentTHE SPECIAL CHILDREN CENTER: $62,933 · Human ServicesSBH COMMUNITY SERVICE NETWORK INC: $12,992 · Human Services+5 more: $4,681 · Human ServicesTHE SEPHARDIC FOOD FUND INC: $21,800 · Food & NutritionSEPHARDIC INSTITUTE SEPHARDIC INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED LEARNING: $17,087 · ReligionTebah Educational Services Inc: $2,002 · Religion+1 more: $501 · Religion
Other$556,267Philanthropy$141,126Health$131,985Youth Development$89,477Human Services$80,606Food & Nutrition$21,800Religion$19,590

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 budgetJEWISH COMMUNAL FUND: $135,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $131,591 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetAmerican Friends of Migdal OHR: $86,966 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetTHE SPECIAL CHILDREN CENTER: $62,933 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetTHE SEPHARDIC FOOD FUND INC: $21,800 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetSEPHARDIC INSTITUTE SEPHARDIC INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED LEARNING: $17,087 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetSBH COMMUNITY SERVICE NETWORK INC: $12,992 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC: $3,800 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMITZVAH MAN FOUNDATION CORP: $2,500 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetSEPHARDIC COMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER INC: $2,151 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTebah Educational Services Inc: $2,002 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetJEWELERS FOR CHILDREN: $1,826 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMISASKIM CORP: $1,430 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEV AHARON: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCentral Fund of Israel: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSEPHARDIC COMMUNITY ALLIANCE: $501 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNE EMAN FOUNDATION USA: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE DWECK AND RAHMEY FAMILY FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetEZRA CORNMAN BAR MITZVAH FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetMassachusetts Adoption Resource Exchange Inc: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBARKAI FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMOISE SAFRA COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $450 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLUNG CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $394 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDEAL SEPHARDIC YOUTH CENTER INC: $360 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $201 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPhysicians For Peace: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE FRIENDSHIP CIRCLE INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSEFARIA INC: $100 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 JEWISH COMMUNAL FUND ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗
  • Who funds American Friends of Migdal OHR ↗
  • Who funds THE SPECIAL CHILDREN CENTER ↗
  • Who funds THE SEPHARDIC FOOD FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds SEPHARDIC INSTITUTE SEPHARDIC INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED LEARNING ↗
  • Who funds SBH COMMUNITY SERVICE NETWORK INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC ↗
  • Who funds MITZVAH MAN FOUNDATION CORP ↗
  • Who funds SEPHARDIC COMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds Tebah Educational Services Inc ↗
  • Who funds JEWELERS FOR CHILDREN ↗
  • Who funds MISASKIM CORP ↗

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.

Jack Adjmi Family Fou…Jewish Communal FundThe Ralph S Gindi Fam…The Amin and Lillian …Chehebar Family Found…The Dweck and Rahmey …Samuel & Mollie Jemal…I Chera & Sons Founda…E R G FoundationIsaac & Marjorie Gind…The Howard Hoffman & …The Mamiye Foundation…
Jack Adjmi Family Foundation IncNY36.3× affinity16 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · The Ralph S Gindi Family Foundation · The Amin and Lillian Adjmi Foundation · Chehebar Family Foundation · The Dweck and Rahmey Family Foundation · Samuel & Mollie Jemal Foundation Co Jem Realty · I Chera & Sons Foundation Inc · E R G Foundation · Isaac & Marjorie Gindi Foundation Inc · The Howard Hoffman & Sons Foundation Inc · The Mamiye Foundation Inc

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
  • The Special Children Center: 5% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get 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 123 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Douek 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