Skip to content
Foundation Q at a glance

· Private foundation

Foundation Q

Its FY2026 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$308k
Granted FY2026still arriving
24
Grants FY2026still arriving
4
States reached
$251k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0182% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Health$1.1MReligion$197kPhilanthropy$41kArts & Culture$35kHuman Services$29kInternational$9kPublic Benefit$5kEducation$3kOther$0
02FY2026 · 24 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2026

  • Under $10k22 grants · $37k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
  • $250k+1 grant · $251k
$559
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BONEI OLAM$250,668
YOUNG ISRAEL OF JAMAICA ESTATES$19,950
GMACH - CONGREGATION BAIS YITZCHOK$7,400
YESHIVA ATERES EITZ CHAIM$6,000
AFIKIM FOUNDATION$5,360
JUST ONE CHESED$5,000
CHAI LIFELINE$3,886
JEWISH CENTER OF ATLANTIC BEACH$3,297
YOUNG ISRAEL OF HOLLISWOOD$891
FOUNDATION FOR NONPROFIT ADVANCEMENT - MAGEN YEHUDA$820
EMATAI$750
YESHIVA HAR TORAH$559
Individual grant recipient$545
RIVKAH LAUFER BIKUR CHOLIM$500
AB CHARITY$500
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 (FY21–26, $1.4M) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, 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%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YAD ELIEZER: $7k → 20%SUNRISE ASSOCIATION: $50 → 6%BONEI OLAM: $558k → 20%BONEI OLAM: $350k → 20%BONEI OLAM: $251k → 20%BONEI OLAM: $108k → 20%BONEI OLAM: $50k → 20%BONEI OLAM: $18k → 20%MISASKIM: $100 → 20%MISASKIM: $100 → 20%BELEV ECHAD: $10k → 17%BELEV ECHAD: $3k → 17%BELEV ECHAD: $2k → 17%BELEV ECHAD: $600 → 17%BELEV ECHAD: $280 → 17%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

IL
NY
NJ
RI
MO
VA
AZ
TN
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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 38 repeat orgs$68k to everyone else

38 repeat relationships: 15 still active in FY2026, 23 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

38
66

Total granted

$1.7M
$55k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+21%
+22%

Still filing today

45%
29%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25’26
HealthHuman ServicesInternationalPhilanthropyEducationReligionOther
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

  • BO
    Bonei Olam Inc
    6× · 2021–2026 · $1.3M · revenue +24%
  • CL
    CHAI LIFELINE INC
    5× · 2021–2026 · $55k · revenue +1%
  • WO
    WORLD OF GIVING INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $40k · revenue +261%

Funded once

  • CL
    CHAI LIFELINE
    one grant, 2025 · $8k
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YAD ELIEZER
    one grant, 2025 · $7k · revenue 0%
  • ZS
    ZICHRON SHLOMO
    one grant, 2021 · $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
Sherit Isroel
—
3
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
4
Ohr Meir Ubracha

The organization provides financial assistance to victims of acts of terrorism in the state of israel.

Philanthropy
5
American Friends of Oseh Chayil

To further jewish education in israel

Religion
6
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
7
Tzemach Yifroch Foundation
—
8
Yad Yosef Foundation
Philanthropy
9
Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation
Philanthropy
10
Tal Hashamayim Foundation
Religion
11
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
12
Smach Zevilin of Ny Inc

To provide financial aid and assistance to the poor, sick & disabled people, and monetary support to needy families in time of need.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Friends of Yad Eliezer; the most unlike its peers is Fred L Mazzilli Foundation 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

38 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 38 of the 113 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)
38/38
Grantees still filing
25/38
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Bonei Olam Inc: $1,335,449 · Human ServicesBonei Olam Inc+4 more: $22,330 · Human ServicesYOUNG ISRAEL OF JAMAICA ESTATES: $106,662 · OtherYOUNG ISRAEL OF …GMACH - CONGREGATION BAIS YITZCHOK: $45,050 · OtherGMACH - CONGREGA…DARKEI YOISHER CENTER: $12,000 · OtherNATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG ISRAEL: $9,028 · Other+87 more: $93,434 · Other+87 moreCHAI LIFELINE INC: $54,826 · Health+6 more: $1,440 · HealthWORLD OF GIVING INC: $40,000 · Philanthropy+3 more: $1,282 · PhilanthropyFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $34,400 · Arts & Culture+1 more: $200 · Arts & CultureTHE AFIKIM FOUNDATION: $23,360 · Religion+1 more: $360 · ReligionOPERATION BENJAMIN INC: $5,000 · Public Benefit+1 more: $100 · Public Benefit
Human Services$1,357,779Other$266,174Health$56,266Philanthropy$41,282Arts & Culture$34,600Religion$23,720Public Benefit$5,100

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 budgetBonei Olam Inc: $1,335,449 over 6y, 1.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $54,826 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetWORLD OF GIVING INC: $40,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $34,400 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE AFIKIM FOUNDATION: $23,360 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetBELEV ECHAD INC: $15,080 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YAD ELIEZER: $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA HAR TORAH: $5,550 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetOPERATION BENJAMIN INC: $5,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetFRIENDS OF ISRAEL DISABLED VETERANS INC: $1,100 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTSQ INC: $1,060 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetRIVKAH LAUFER BIKUR CHOLIM: $880 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetSHARE OF NEW SQUARE INC DBA CHESED 247: $820 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetJust One Chesed Inc: $532 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNITY WARRIORS INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC: $430 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVAT NOAM: $350 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRED L MAZZILLI FOUNDATION INC: $300 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSharsheret Inc: $280 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetREFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES: $280 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetKESHER NAFSHI INC: $280 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TIKVAH FUND: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBIKUR CHOLIM OF MANHATTAN INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMISASKIM CORP: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN SOCIETY FOR YAD VASHEM INC: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetKIDS OF COURAGE INC: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA UNIVERSITY: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NEXT STEP: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCORRIE TEN BOOM FELLOWSHIP: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSUNRISE DAY CAMPS ASSOCIATION INC: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSMILING SOULS INC: $50 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 Bonei Olam Inc ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗
  • Who funds WORLD OF GIVING INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC ↗
  • Who funds THE AFIKIM FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds BELEV ECHAD INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YAD ELIEZER ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA HAR TORAH ↗
  • Who funds OPERATION BENJAMIN INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF ISRAEL DISABLED VETERANS INC ↗
  • Who funds TSQ INC ↗
  • Who funds RIVKAH LAUFER BIKUR CHOLIM ↗
  • Who funds SHARE OF NEW SQUARE INC DBA CHESED 247 ↗

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 Communal FundThe Ojc FundGranit FoundationAlyad Foundation IncThe Frieman FoundationCross River Community…Jewish Federation of …FjcThe Norman and Julia …Astar Foundation IncGs Donor Advised Phil…Morgan Stanley Global…
Jewish Communal FundNY31× affinity19 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · The Ojc Fund · Granit Foundation · Alyad Foundation Inc · The Frieman Foundation · Cross River Community Foundation · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · Fjc · The Norman and Julia Bobrow Family Foundation · Astar Foundation Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust 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 Foundation Q funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Foundation Q. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 4%
  • Sharsheret Inc: 4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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 Foundation Q?

Find your warmest path to Foundation Q 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 113 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Foundation Q’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