Skip to content
Englanoff Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Englanoff 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.

$46k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$12k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$486kEducation$103kInternational$66kHuman Services$13kCrime & Legal$10kHealth$6kFood & Nutrition$3kCivil Rights$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $24k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $22k
$4,100
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE WESTSIDE SHUL$12,000
CENTRAL FUND OF ISRAEL$10,000
YULA BOYS HIGH SCHOOL$6,800
HAPPY MINYAN$6,000
BETH JACOB CONGREGATION$4,100
CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN FDN$2,000
YOUNG ISRAEL OF CENTURY CITY$1,800
JEWISH NATIONAL FUND$1,800
BELEV ECHAD$1,000
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 (FY24–25, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, 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%BELEV ECHAD: $1k → 17%ATIME: $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.
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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$642k · 18 repeat orgs$88k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +48% since the first grant, against +37% for those funded once.

18 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
25

Total granted

$642k
$81k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+48%
+37%

Still filing today

28%
52%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k 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
InternationalHealthReligionPhilanthropyArts & CultureHuman 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

  • ZO
    ZION ORPHANAGE INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $30k · revenue +43%
  • CF
    Central Fund of Israel
    3× · 2023–2025 · $29k · revenue +31%
  • CH
    CAMP HASC INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $19k · revenue +48%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $33k
  • TC
    THE CLUBHOUSE FOR RESPITE AND INCLU
    one grant, 2022 · $10k
  • C
    CHABAD
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
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
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
2
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
3
Sherit Isroel
—
4
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
5
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation
Philanthropy
7
Yad Laniyim
Philanthropy
8
Yad Yosef Foundation
Philanthropy
9
Zicron Eliyahu Inc
—
10
Ksav Sofer Inc
Philanthropy
11
Zechut Avot Foundation
Philanthropy
12
The Jerusalem Connection
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Birthright Israel Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Blood Cancer United 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

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 46 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
17/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HARKHAM HILLEL HEBREW ACADEMY: $113,800 · OtherHARKHAM HILLEL HEBREW ACADEMYWEST COAST TORAH RETREAT CAMP CENTE: $111,000 · OtherWEST COAST TORAH RETREAT CAMP CENTEIndividual grant recipient: $80,200 · OtherIndividual grant recipientYULA BOYS HIGH SCHOOL: $73,900 · OtherYULA BOYS HIGH SCHOOLTHE WESTSIDE SHUL: $68,690 · OtherTHE WESTSIDE SHULORTHODOX UNION: $45,000 · OtherORTHODOX UNIONIndividual grant recipient: $32,900 · OtherSHALHEVET HIGH SCHOOL: $23,590 · Other+19 more: $73,108 · Other+19 moreZION ORPHANAGE INC: $30,100 · InternationalZION ORPHA…Central Fund of Israel: $29,000 · InternationalCentral Fu…JEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $3,600 · InternationalJEWISH NAT…FRIENDS OF ISRAEL DISABLED VETERANS INC: $2,500 · International+1 more: $1,000 · InternationalCAMP HASC INC: $19,000 · ReligionOPENDOR MEDIA INC: $7,500 · ReligionYOUNG SEPHARDIC COMMUNITY CENTER: $1,800 · ReligionMESIVTA OF GREATER LOS ANGELES: $6,000 · EducationAMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET ISRAEL INC: $2,500 · PhilanthropyROFEH CHOLIM CANCER SOCIETY INC: $1,505 · PhilanthropyBIKUR CHOLIM: $1,800 · HealthYESH TIKVA INC: $1,000 · HealthBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $250 · HealthCHAI LIFELINE INC: $180 · HealthA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $1,000 · Human ServicesBELEV ECHAD INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesSIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER INC: $1,000 · Arts & CultureROCK4ISRAEL INC: $180 · Arts & Culture
Other$622,188International$66,200Religion$28,300Education$6,000Philanthropy$4,005Health$3,230Human Services$2,000Arts & Culture$1,180

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetZION ORPHANAGE INC: $30,100 over 8y, 1.6% of budgetCentral Fund of Israel: $29,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCAMP HASC INC: $19,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetOPENDOR MEDIA INC: $7,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetMESIVTA OF GREATER LOS ANGELES: $6,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $3,600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF ISRAEL DISABLED VETERANS INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET ISRAEL INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBIKUR CHOLIM: $1,800 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetYOUNG SEPHARDIC COMMUNITY CENTER: $1,800 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetROFEH CHOLIM CANCER SOCIETY INC: $1,505 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTIKVAH-ETTA AND LAZEAR ISRAEL CENTER FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESH TIKVA INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetROCK4ISRAEL INC: $180 over 1y, 5.8% 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 ZION ORPHANAGE INC ↗
  • Who funds Central Fund of Israel ↗
  • Who funds CAMP HASC INC ↗
  • Who funds OPENDOR MEDIA INC ↗
  • Who funds MESIVTA OF GREATER LOS ANGELES ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF ISRAEL DISABLED VETERANS INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET ISRAEL INC ↗
  • Who funds BIKUR CHOLIM ↗
  • Who funds YOUNG SEPHARDIC COMMUNITY CENTER ↗
  • Who funds ROFEH CHOLIM CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds TIKVAH-ETTA AND LAZEAR ISRAEL CENTER FOR THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED ↗
  • Who funds YESH TIKVA INC ↗
  • Who funds A Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange ↗
  • Who funds BELEV ECHAD INC ↗
  • Who funds BIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER 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.

Jewish Community Foun…The Alon and Rosana M…Jewish Communal FundDavmarn FoundationLee and Anne Samson C…The Sassoon Family Fo…Jay Morris Foundation…Jewish Federation Cou…Jack and Gitta Nagel …The Rubinstein Family…Ryzman Foundation IncGs Donor Advised Phil…
Jewish Community Foundation of Los AngelesCA27.1× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · The Alon and Rosana Miller Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Davmarn Foundation · Lee and Anne Samson Charitable Foundation · The Sassoon Family Foundation · Jay Morris Foundation Inc · Jewish Federation Council of Greater La · Jack and Gitta Nagel Foundation · The Rubinstein Family Foundation · Ryzman Foundation Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management 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 Englanoff Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Englanoff Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s 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 46 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 Englanoff 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