Skip to content
Evelyn & Herbert Chernis Foundation Inc Co at a glance

· Private foundation

Evelyn & Herbert Chernis Foundation Inc Co

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.

$167k
Granted FY2022
11
Grants FY2022
4
States reached
$90k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of Evelyn & Herbert Chernis Foundation Inc Co’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2022, the last year Evelyn & Herbert Chernis Foundation Inc Co named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $167k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

8
’20
3
’21
6
’22
4
’23
4
’24
0
’25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Philanthropy$1.3MEducation$302kArts & Culture$63kPublic Benefit$20kHuman Services$2kAnimals$1k
02FY2022 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2022

  • Under $10k7 grants · $27k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $50k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $90k
$5,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NEWTON SOUTH HIGH SCHOOL$90,000
JEWISH FEDERATION OF THE DESERT$30,000
NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE$10,000
Desert Film Society$10,000
MCCALLUM THEATER$7,500
LITERARY SOCIETY OF THE DESERT$5,000
UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA FDN$5,000
HEBREW FREE LOAN$5,000
DESERT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$2,000
ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN$1,000
ISRAEL GUIDE DOG CENTER FOR THE BLING$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 (FY20–22, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, 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%ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN: $1k → 7%ISRAEL GUIDE DOG CENTER FOR THE BLING: $1k → 6%ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN: $1k → 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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$379k · 9 repeat orgs$9k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2022, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call). Read against FY2022, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
4

Total granted

$379k
$8k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+54%
+94%

Still filing today

56%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
EducationHuman ServicesArts & CulturePublic BenefitOther
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

  • University of Arizona Foundation
    5× · 2020–2024 · $25k · revenue +54%
  • LS
    LITERARY SOCIETY OF THE DESERT
    4× · 2021–2024 · $20k · revenue ×344
  • HF
    HEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO
    4× · 2021–2024 · $20k · revenue +69%

Funded once

  • CO
    College of the Desert Foundationgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $5k · revenue +180%
  • PS
    Palm Springs Cultural Centergraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $1k · revenue +94%
  • CV
    COACHELLA VALLEY REPERTORYgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $1k · revenue +67%
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 Federation of Las Vegas Sigesmund Center

To administer and allocate charitable funds to international, national and local jewish organizations.

—
2
Jewish Federation of San Diego County

Jewish federation of san diego county is dedicated to building a vibrant, caring, connected, and enduring jewish community.

—
3
Desert Recreation Foundation

To enrich and preserve the quality of life for residents by raising funds and garnering support to purchase, develop, enhance, preserve, promote, and expand the coachella valley's recreational activities, programs, parks, properties, and…

Community Improvement
4
California Desert Arts Council Llc
Arts & Culture
5
Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Phoenix

Serving and supporting a vibrant, enduring jewish community.

Philanthropy
6
Desert Classic Charities

Donate to charitable organizations

—
7
Jewish Federation of Greater Santa Barbara

The jewish federation of greater santa barbara is dedicated to building a vibrant and inclusive local jewish community, to enhancing the well being of jews in santa barbara, israel, and throughout the world, and to strengthening the…

Philanthropy
8
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
9
D&D Support Foundation

The purpose of this corporation is to support desert community foundation, a california nonprofit public benefit corporation; california community foundation, a california nonprofit public benefit corporation; and orange county community…

—
10
Rancho Mirage Library & Observatory Foundation

To fund-raise for supplemental funding for rancho mirage library & observatory programs and collections.

Education
11
Palomar College Foundation

The palomar college foundation, with the support of the community, secures supplemental funding, other resources, and provides program support for the benefit of palomar community college and its students.

Education
12
Phoenix Jewish Free Loan Association

Jewish free loan provides interest free loans to arizona's jewish community.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Arizona Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Alliance 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.
04the grantee network

12 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. 12 of the 17 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
11/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $1,112,025 · Community ImprovementFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUNDNEWTON SOUTH HIGH SCHOOL: $245,000 · OtherNEWTON SOUTH HIGH SCHOOLJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM SPRINGS AND DESERT AREA: $148,800 · OtherJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM SPRI…NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE: $27,000 · OtherNEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE+4 more: $26,500 · Other+4 moreUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $25,000 · EducationRANCHO MIRAGE WRITERS FESTIVAL: $15,000 · EducationCollege of the Desert Foundation: $5,000 · Education+1 more: $1,200 · EducationLITERARY SOCIETY OF THE DESERT: $20,000 · Arts & CultureHEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO: $20,000 · Public BenefitDESERT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $6,000 · PhilanthropyALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN INC: $2,000 · Human ServicesISRAEL GUIDE DOG CENTER FOR THE BLIND: $1,000 · Human Services
Community Improvement$1,112,025Other$447,300Education$46,200Arts & Culture$20,000Public Benefit$20,000Philanthropy$6,000Human Services$3,000

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 budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $1,112,025 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM SPRINGS AND DESERT AREA: $148,800 over 5y, 1.6% of budgetUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $25,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetLITERARY SOCIETY OF THE DESERT: $20,000 over 4y, 2.1% of budgetHEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO: $20,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetRANCHO MIRAGE WRITERS FESTIVAL: $15,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetDESERT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $6,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCollege of the Desert Foundation: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPalm Springs Cultural Center: $1,200 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetISRAEL GUIDE DOG CENTER FOR THE BLIND: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOACHELLA VALLEY REPERTORY: $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.

Inland Empire Communi…Victor Family Foundat…The Galen Family Foun…The Grace Helen Spear…Milwaukee Jewish Fede…The Harriet K and How…The Hyman and Mintz F…The Auen FoundationThe Coeta and Donald …Morgan Stanley Global…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…
Inland Empire Community FoundationCA17.5× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Inland Empire Community Foundation · Victor Family Foundation co Jonathan Victor · The Galen Family Foundation · The Grace Helen Spearman Foundation · Milwaukee Jewish Federation Inc · The Harriet K and Howard N Bernstein Charitable Foundation · The Hyman and Mintz Family Foundation · The Auen Foundation · The Coeta and Donald Barker Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Evelyn & Herbert Chernis Foundation Inc Co funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Evelyn & Herbert Chernis Foundation Inc Co. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Alliance for Children Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
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 17 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Evelyn & Herbert Chernis’ 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