Skip to content
Garfinkle Family Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Garfinkle Family Charitable Trust

Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$14k
Granted FY2023
3
Grants FY2023
2
States reached
$13k
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, FY2017 to 2023.

Philanthropy$551kInternational$89kReligion$66kHealth$4kRecreation & Sports$4kArts & Culture$3kPublic Benefit$500Human Services$500Other$0
02FY2023 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k2 grants · $1k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $13k
$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JEWISH FEDERATION OF SO PALM BEACH$12,715
HILLEL OF BROWARD AND PALM BEACH$1,000
HIAS$250
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 (FY22–22, $500) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%BOCA WEST CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $500 → 11%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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$699k · 10 repeat orgs$52k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +111% since the first grant, against +17% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2023, 7 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
8

Total granted

$699k
$52k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+111%
+17%

Still filing today

60%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
InternationalHealthCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesPhilanthropyArts & CultureOther
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

  • The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc
    4× · 2017–2021 · $85k · revenue +24%
  • HO
    HILLEL OF BROWARD AND PALM BEACH INC
    6× · 2018–2023 · $7k · revenue +268%
  • TJ
    THE JEWISH WOMEN'S ARCHIVE INC
    4× · 2018–2022 · $3k · revenue +111%

Funded once

  • J
    JDC
    one grant, 2022 · $35k
  • CB
    CONGREGATION BETH ISREAL
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
  • TB
    TEMPLE BETH TIKVAH
    one grant, 2022 · $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
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…

—
2
The Jerusalem Connection
—
3
Sherit Isroel
—
4
National Council of Jewish Women Inc Jersey Hills Section
—
5
The Bnai Jacob Foundation
—
6
University of Judaism Foundation
—
7
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
8
The Israel Innovation Fund Inc

Our vision is to reignite the zionist spirit and meet the needs of jewish civilization in the twenty-first century by connecting people around the world through the vibrancy and creativity of contemporary israeli culture.

Arts & Culture
9
Delegation of Jewish American Students (Dojas)
—
10
Brown Hillel Foundation

Brown risd hillel encourages and supports a diversity of students as they explore, develop and deepen their jewish identities. we are committed to having judaism serve as a source of meaning and growth during their time on college hill and…

—
11
Bais Yisrael Foundation
—
12
The Jacob and Hilda Blaustein Foundation Inc
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Birthright Israel Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Daughters of Miriam 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

10 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. 10 of the 18 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)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JEWISH FEDERATION OF SO PALM BEACH: $550,715 · OtherJEWISH FEDERATION OF SO PALM BEACHJDC: $35,000 · OtherJDCOHR TORAH STONE ISRAEL: $27,500 · Other+6 more: $40,680 · Other+6 moreThe American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc: $85,000 · InternationalThe American …BIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION: $3,000 · International+1 more: $750 · InternationalTHE JEWISH WOMEN'S ARCHIVE INC: $2,500 · Arts & CultureBoca Raton Regional Hospital Foundation Inc: $2,500 · Community ImprovementDAUGHTERS OF MIRIAM FOUNDATION INC: $1,500 · PhilanthropyDAUGHTERS OF MIRIAM CENTER: $1,000 · HealthCLAL-THE NATIONAL JEWISH CENTER FOR LEARNING AND LEADERSHIP INC: $500 · ReligionBOCA WEST CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION FKA BOCA WEST COMMUNITY CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $500 · Human Services
Other$653,895International$88,750Arts & Culture$2,500Community Improvement$2,500Philanthropy$1,500Health$1,000Religion$500Human Services$500

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetThe American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc: $85,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHILLEL OF BROWARD AND PALM BEACH INC: $7,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetBIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE JEWISH WOMEN'S ARCHIVE INC: $2,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetBoca Raton Regional Hospital Foundation Inc: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDAUGHTERS OF MIRIAM FOUNDATION INC: $1,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetDAUGHTERS OF MIRIAM CENTER: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHIAS INC: $750 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCLAL-THE NATIONAL JEWISH CENTER FOR LEARNING AND LEADERSHIP INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOCA WEST CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION FKA BOCA WEST COMMUNITY CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $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.

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.

Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA5.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Garfinkle Family Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Garfinkle Family Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 88%
  • Hias Inc: 88% of income from government
  • Daughters of Miriam Center: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely 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 Garfinkle Family Charitable Trust?

Find your warmest path to Garfinkle Family Charitable Trust 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 18 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Garfinkle 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