Skip to content
Evan and Layla Green Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Evan and Layla Green Family Foundation

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.

$502k
Granted FY2024still arriving
17
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$105k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

International$1.4MHuman Services$219kPhilanthropy$101kFood & Nutrition$61kHealth$45kArts & Culture$35kYouth Development$12kReligion$10kOther$0
02FY2024 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k4 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $135k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $355k
$20,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$2.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AMIT CHILDREN$105,000
AMIT CHILDREN$100,000
CENTRAL FUND OF ISRAEL$50,000
OLIVE CREST$50,000
JEWISH FOUNDERS NETWORK$50,000
IMPACT SE DBA PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT$25,000
CREATIVE COMMUNITY FOR PEACE$25,000
OLIVE CREST$20,000
IMPACT FORUM FOUNDATION$20,000
IMPACT FORUM FOUNDATION$15,000
NEVADA CHILDHOOD CANCER FOUNDATION$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
HAND IN HAND$10,000
ISRAEL PARASPORT CENTER$5,000
THREE SQUARE FOOD BANK$5,000
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 (FY20–24, $22k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 95% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%TAHOE YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES: $1k → 8%THE CUPCAKE GIRLS: $10k → 13%THE CUPCAKE GIRLS: $2k → 13%ST JUDE'S RANCH FOR CHILDREN: $5k → 13%ST JUDE'S RANCH FOR CHILDREN: $2k → 13%ST JUDE'S RANCH FOR CHILDREN: $2k → 13%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 100% of Evan and Layla Green Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 17% of the giving stays in NV; by stated purpose, 0%.

Evan and Layla Green Family Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
$1.7M · 10 repeat orgs$168k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +47% since the first grant, against +7% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
4

Total granted

$1.7M
$32k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+47%
+7%

Still filing today

90%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $136k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalHuman ServicesHealthPhilanthropyFood & NutritionCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • AC
    AMIT CHILDREN INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $1.3M · revenue +47%
  • OC
    OLIVE CREST
    4× · 2021–2024 · $175k · revenue +72%
  • NC
    NEVADA CHILDHOOD CANCER FOUNDATION
    3× · 2022–2024 · $40k · revenue +35%

Funded once

  • JF
    JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE AGENCY
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue -4%
  • CL
    CHAI LIFELINE INC
    one grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue +7%
  • HA
    HEARTS ALIVE VILLAGE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $1k · revenue +44%
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
Jewish Life Foundation
—
2
Yad Yosef Foundation
Philanthropy
3
Tal Hashamayim Foundation
Religion
4
The Jerusalem Connection
—
5
Bais Yisrael Foundation
—
6
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
7
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
8
Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation
Philanthropy
9
Connect Israel

Connect israel is a life-long program that aims to strengthen the gap between american jews and israelis through business, creative teamwork, and developing personal relationships.

International
10
The Shalom Ish Foundation
Philanthropy
11
The Jewish Agency for Israel

The jewish agency binds jews across ideologies and civilizations together in a worldwide jewish family with israel at its center. it provides the global framework for aliyah, ensures global jewish safety, strengthens jewish identity and…

—
12
The Chasdei Shimon Foundation
Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Funders Network; the most unlike its peers is St Judes Ranch for Children Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

17 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. 17 of the 22 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)
17/17
Grantees still filing
11/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AMIT CHILDREN INC: $1,327,100 · InternationalAMIT CHILDREN INCCentral Fund of Israel: $50,000 · International+2 more: $35,000 · InternationalOLIVE CREST: $175,000 · HealthOLIVE CRESTNEVADA CHILDHOOD CANCER FOUNDATION: $40,000 · HealthNEVADA CHILD…+1 more: $5,000 · HealthCREATIVE COMMUNITY FOR PEACE: $35,000 · OtherIMPACT SE DBA PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT: $25,000 · OtherJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE AGENCY: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherISRAEL PARASPORT CENTER: $5,000 · OtherASSISTING LIVES IN LAS VEGAS: $9,000 · Other+2 more: $2,000 · OtherJEWISH FUNDERS NETWORK: $65,850 · PhilanthropyIMPACT FORUM FOUNDATION: $35,000 · PhilanthropyTHREE SQUARE: $61,000 · Food & NutritionTHE CUPCAKE GIRLS: $12,000 · Human ServicesST JUDES RANCH FOR CHILDREN INC: $9,000 · Human ServicesTahoe Youth and Family Services: $1,000 · Human ServicesGROWTORAH INC: $10,000 · Environment
International$1,412,100Health$220,000Other$111,000Philanthropy$100,850Food & Nutrition$61,000Human Services$22,000Environment$10,000

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 budgetAMIT CHILDREN INC: $1,327,100 over 5y, 5.9% of budgetOLIVE CREST: $175,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH FUNDERS NETWORK: $65,850 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetTHREE SQUARE: $61,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetCentral Fund of Israel: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNEVADA CHILDHOOD CANCER FOUNDATION: $40,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetIMPACT FORUM FOUNDATION: $35,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE AGENCY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE CUPCAKE GIRLS: $12,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetGROWTORAH INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetHAND IN HAND AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE CENTER FOR JEWISH-ARAB EDUCATION IN ISRA: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetASSISTING LIVES IN LAS VEGAS: $9,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHEARTS ALIVE VILLAGE INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTahoe Youth and Family Services: $1,000 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.

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.

NV Energy Charitable …The Mel & Ruth Wolzin…Wynn Resorts Foundati…Mgm Resorts FoundationGs Donor Advised Phil…The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
NV Energy Charitable FoundationNV15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: NV Energy Charitable Foundation · The Mel & Ruth Wolzinger Foundation · Wynn Resorts Foundation · Mgm Resorts Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Evan and Layla Green Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Evan and Layla Green Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Evan and Layla Green Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Evan and Layla Green Family Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 22 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 Evan and Layla Green 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