Skip to content
Fab 5 Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Fab 5 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.

$16k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$7k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Recreation & Sports$227kHealth$218kReligion$70kYouth Development$56kCivil Rights$36kPhilanthropy$35kHuman Services$16kEducation$15kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ISRAEL SPORTS CENTER FOR THE DISABLED- ISCD$7,000
JCFS CHICAGO$5,000
MORAN CENTER FOR YOUTH ADVOCACY$4,322
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 (FY19–24, $42k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERIC: $5k → 14%FAMILY SERVICES OF GLENCOE: $5k → 14%FAMILY SERVICES OF GLENCOE: $5k → 14%FAMILY SERVICES OF GLENCOE: $3k → 14%GLENCOE YOUTH SERVICES: $3k → 14%FAMILY SERVICES OF GLENCOE: $3k → 14%GLENKIRK: $5k → 14%GLENKIRK: $5k → 14%GLENKIRK: $5k → 14%GLENKIRK: $3k → 14%GLENKIRK: $1k → 14%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.
$634k · 14 repeat orgs$87k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
22

Total granted

$634k
$87k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+42%
+43%

Still filing today

57%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthPhilanthropyEducationCivil RightsRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • UO
    University of Michigan
    4× · 2020–2023 · $25k · revenue +139%
  • RF
    REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION
    4× · 2020–2023 · $25k · revenue +165%
  • G
    Glenkirk
    5× · 2020–2024 · $19k · revenue +42%

Funded once

  • CS
    CLAY SCHERB 2022 GIFT TRUST
    one grant, 2023 · $15k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
  • RT
    Repro TLCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $8k · revenue +348%
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
Roosevelt University

Roosevelt university is an independent, non-profit, metropolitan university and national leader in educating socially conscious citizens for active and dedicated lives as leaders in their professions and their communities. the university's…

—
2
Lehigh University

The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…

Education
3
Trustees of Tufts College

Education and Research

Education
4
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
5
University of New Haven

The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…

Education
6
Golden Gate University

Golden gate university prepares individuals to lead and serve by providing high quality, practice-based educational programs in law, taxation, business and related professions - as a nonprofit institution - in an innovative and challenging…

Education
7
Vanderbilt University

See Disclosure Above.

Education
8
Fordham University

Fordham university, the jesuit university of new york, is committed to the discovery of wisdom and the transmission of learning, through research and through education of the highest quality. for more information, see schedule o.

Education
9
Loyola University of Chicago

We are chicago's jesuit, catholic university - a diverse community seeking god in all things and working to expand knowledge in the service of humanity through learning, justice, and faith.

Education
10
The George Washington University

The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…

Education
11
The Trustees of Princeton University

Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…

Education
12
President and Trustees of Bates College

Bates is a college of the liberal arts and sciences, and is a coeducational, nonsectarian, residential college with special commitments to academic rigor, and to assuring in all of its efforts the dignity of each individual, and access to…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Reproductive Freedom for All; the most unlike its peers is University of Michigan. 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

19 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. 19 of the 36 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)
19/19
Grantees still filing
18/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ISRAEL SPORTS CENTER FOR THE DISABLED- ISCD: $216,000 · OtherISRAEL SPORTS CENTER FOR THE DISABLED- ISCDPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF IL: $134,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF ILAM SHALOM: $67,100 · OtherAM SHALOMMORAN CENTER FOR YOUTH ADVOCACY: $57,322 · OtherMORAN CENTER FOR YOUTH ADVOCACYUniversity of Michigan: $25,000 · OtherREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION: $25,000 · Other+17 more: $87,590 · Other+17 moreGlenkirk: $18,500 · Human ServicesFAMILY SERVICE OF GLENCOE: $15,600 · Human ServicesREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL: $5,000 · Human ServicesGLENCOE YOUTH SERVICES A CORPORATION: $2,500 · Human ServicesTHE JACKSON CHANCE FOUNDATION: $7,800 · HealthRepro TLC: $7,500 · HealthGREAT LAKES ADAPTIVE SPORTS ASSOCIATION: $1,000 · HealthFOR AUTISTIC KIDS FOUNDATION: $12,950 · PhilanthropyPAT TILLMAN FOUNDATION: $2,500 · PhilanthropyNorthwestern University: $15,000 · Recreation & SportsCOLLEGE BOUND OPPORTUNITIES: $10,000 · EducationTHE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE TULANE EDUCATIONAL FUND: $5,000 · EducationAMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE: $5,000 · Civil Rights
Other$612,012Human Services$41,600Health$16,300Philanthropy$15,450Recreation & Sports$15,000Education$15,000Civil Rights$5,000

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 budgetUniversity of Michigan: $25,000 over 4y, 3.0% of budgetREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetGlenkirk: $18,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetFAMILY SERVICE OF GLENCOE: $15,600 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetNorthwestern University: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFOR AUTISTIC KIDS FOUNDATION: $12,950 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetCOLLEGE BOUND OPPORTUNITIES: $10,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetTHE JACKSON CHANCE FOUNDATION: $7,800 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetRepro TLC: $7,500 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE TULANE EDUCATIONAL FUND: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGLENCOE YOUTH SERVICES A CORPORATION: $2,500 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetPAT TILLMAN FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetStandUp for Kids: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $1,800 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGREAT LAKES ADAPTIVE SPORTS ASSOCIATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetASPEN HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNOURISHING HOPE: $500 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 University of Michigan ↗
  • Who funds REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Glenkirk ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY SERVICE OF GLENCOE ↗
  • Who funds Northwestern University ↗
  • Who funds FOR AUTISTIC KIDS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds COLLEGE BOUND OPPORTUNITIES ↗
  • Who funds THE JACKSON CHANCE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Repro TLC ↗
  • Who funds REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE ↗
  • Who funds THE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE TULANE EDUCATIONAL FUND ↗
  • Who funds GLENCOE YOUTH SERVICES A CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds PAT TILLMAN FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds StandUp for Kids ↗
  • Who funds HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE ↗
  • Who funds GREAT LAKES ADAPTIVE SPORTS ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds ASPEN HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds NOURISHING HOPE ↗

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.

The 4jd Family Founda…Sacks Family Foundati…AbbVie FoundationJewish Federation of …National Philanthropi…The Pfizer Foundation…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…The Blackbaud Giving …American Endowment Fo…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Network for Good
The 4jd Family FoundationIL13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The 4jd Family Foundation · Sacks Family Foundation · AbbVie Foundation · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · National Philanthropic Trust · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Network for Good

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 Fab 5 Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Fab 5 Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 Fab 5 Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Fab 5 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 36 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 Fab 5’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