Skip to content
Gene S Moss Foundation II Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Gene S Moss Foundation II Inc

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.

$795k
Granted FY2024still arriving
12
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$155k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2025.

Health$560kInternational$525kScience & Tech$235kReligion$105kPublic Benefit$80kArts & Culture$50kHuman Services$35kFood & Nutrition$30kOther$0
02FY2024 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $90k
  • $50k–250k9 grants · $705k
$55,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$13M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM$155,000
HIAS$85,000
CANCER WELLNESS CENTER$85,000
AMERICAN COMM FOR THE WEIZMANN INST OF SCIENCE$85,000
BREAST CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION$85,000
FOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY FUND$55,000
JEWISH COLORADO$55,000
GILDA'S CLUB CHICAGO$50,000
WELLNESS HOUSE$50,000
STAENBERG-LOUP JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER$35,000
SO ALL MAY EAT CAFE$30,000
FOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY FUND$25,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY23–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 91% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $235k → 17%FOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY FUND: $55k → 14%JEWISH COLORADO: $55k → 12%WELLNESS HOUSE: $50k → 7%CANCER WELLNESS CENTER: $85k → 14%HIAS: $85k → 8%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $155k → 17%FOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY FUND: $25k → 14%JEWISH COLORADO: $50k → 12%CANCER WELLNESS CENTER: $40k → 14%FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH: $50k → 17%STAENBERG-LOUP JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $35k → 12%GILDA'S CLUB CHICAGO: $50k → 14%AMERICAN COMM FOR THE WEIZMANN INST OF SCIENCE: $150k → 17%SO ALL MAY EAT CAFE: $30k → 12%AMERICAN COMM FOR THE WEIZMANN INST OF SCIENCE: $85k → 17%BREAST CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $150k → 17%BREAST CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $85k → 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.
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.

65%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$985k · 4 repeat orgs$530k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +8% since the first grant, against -33% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
3

Total granted

$985k
$200k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
-33%

Still filing today

75%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $330k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’23’24
HealthInternationalPublic Safety & DisasterArts & CultureCivil RightsOther
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

  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM
    2× · 2023–2024 · $390k · revenue -51%
  • AC
    AMERICAN COMM FOR THE WEIZMANN INST OF SCIENCE
    2× · 2023–2024 · $235k
  • THE BREAST CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $235k · revenue +8%

Funded once

  • THE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCHgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue +124%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -45%
  • FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -33%
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
Israel Cancer Research Fund Inc

To support cancer research in israel, for the benefit of israel and all mankind.

—
2
Fcancer

FCANCER IS dedicated to advancing health equity through early detection and prevention programs, and by providing resources to navigate, manage, and cope with cancer.

Health
3
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc

The mission of dfci is to provide expert, compassionate, and equitable care to children, adults, and their families, while advancing the understanding, diagnosis, treatment, cure, and prevention of cancer and related diseases. we train new…

Health
4
Samuel Waxman Cancer Research Foundation

The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…

—
5
Nevada Cancer Research Foundation Inc

Cancer research.

Health
6
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
7
American Friends of Hebrew University Inc

Support the hebrew univ. of jerusalem, israel's foremost center of higher edu. & research.

International
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
Targeting Resistance in Cancer Cooperative
Health
10
Dana-Farber Cancer Care Network Inc

The mission of Dana-Farber Cancer Care Network (DFCCN) is to promote and support, directly or indirectly, the interests and purposes of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI).

Health
11
Jewish Federation of Cincinnati

The Jewish Federation of Cincinnati develops and connects leaders, contributors, organizations, and ideas to build an inclusive Jewish community that helps people in need, supports Israel, and assures a vibrant Jewish future.

Philanthropy
12
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…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Friends of Magen David Adom; the most unlike its peers is Friends of the Israel Defense Forces. 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

11 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. 11 of the 14 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
5/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $390,000 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOMHIAS INC: $85,000 · InternationalHIAS INCFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $50,000 · InternationalFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCESCANCER WELLNESS CENTER: $125,000 · HealthCANCER WELLNESS CENTERTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH: $100,000 · HealthTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUN…Wellness House: $50,000 · HealthWellness HouseGILDA'S CLUB CHICAGO: $50,000 · HealthGILDA'S CLUB CHICAGOAMERICAN COMM FOR THE WEIZMANN INST OF SCIENCE: $235,000 · OtherAMERICAN COMM FOR TH…STAENBERG-LOUP JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $35,000 · OtherSTAENBERG-LOUP JEWIS…SO ALL MAY EAT CAFE: $30,000 · OtherSO ALL MAY EAT CAFETHE BREAST CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $235,000 · Public Safety & DisasterTHE BREAST CANCE…JEWISHColorado: $105,000 · PhilanthropyFOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY FUND: $80,000 · Civil RightsFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $50,000 · Arts & Culture
International$525,000Health$325,000Other$300,000Public Safety & Disaster$235,000Philanthropy$105,000Civil Rights$80,000Arts & Culture$50,000

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 budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $390,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE BREAST CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $235,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCANCER WELLNESS CENTER: $125,000 over 2y, 3.6% of budgetJEWISHColorado: $105,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHIAS INC: $85,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY FUND: $80,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWellness House: $50,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetGILDA'S CLUB CHICAGO: $50,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $50,000 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.

Morgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…
Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust IncIN11× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Gene S Moss Foundation II Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Gene S Moss Foundation II Inc. 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 →median 88%
  • Hias Inc: 88% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get 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.

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 14 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.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $925k of grant expense with no grantee named in the published copy. A private foundation itemizes every grant it makes, so a return carrying none has filed its list as an attachment that the public copy does not include. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Gene S Moss Foundation II’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