Skip to content
Glick Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Glick Charitable Foundation

Its FY2021 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$3k
Granted FY2021
1
Grants FY2021
1
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2021.

Philanthropy$32kReligion$12kHealth$8kEducation$775Science & Tech$200Human Services$172International$35Other$0
02FY2021 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$3,298
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JEWISH HEALTHCARE CENTER$3,298
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 (FY19–19, $25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%HOSPICE OF PALM BEACH COUNTY: $25 → 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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$20k · 9 repeat orgs$3k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +28% since the first grant, against +22% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2021, 8 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
15

Total granted

$20k
$3k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
+22%

Still filing today

33%
47%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21
HealthEducationInternationalHuman ServicesOther
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

  • JH
    JEWISH HEALTHCARE CENTER INC
    5× · 2017–2021 · $6k · revenue +20%
  • FA
    FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2018–2019 · $500 · revenue +53%
  • WA
    WORCESTER ACADEMY
    2× · 2017–2019 · $250 · revenue +28%

Funded once

  • TS
    TEMPLE SHIR TIKVA
    one grant, 2017 · $1k
  • HF
    HOAGLUND FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $500
  • TF
    TANGLEWOOD FUND
    one grant, 2018 · $460
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
Neurology Associates of Stony Brook University Faculty Practice Corp

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
2
Stony Brook Internists University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
3
Stony Brook Surgical Associates University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
4
Stony Brook Urology University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
5
Stony Brook Ophthalmology University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
6
Stony Brook Orthopedic Associates University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
7
Northeast College of Health Sciences

Northeast college of health sciences (the college) is committed to academic excellence, leadership, and professional best practices in the health sciences.

Education
8
University Associates in Obstetrics and Gynecology University Faculty Pract ice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
9
Stony Brook Childrens Services University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
10
University of Maryland Neurology Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

—
11
University of Maryland Anesthesiology Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

—
12
University of Maryland Neurosurgeryassociates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Daughters of Miriam Center; the most unlike its peers is Child Neurology Education and Research Foundation. 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

13 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. 13 of the 27 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
11/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JEWISH FEDERATION OF CENTRAL MASSACHUSETTS INC: $20,816 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDERATION OF CENTRAL MASSACHUSETTS INCJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INC: $10,018 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INCCONGREGATION BETH ISRAEL: $10,156 · OtherCONGREGATION BETH ISRAELTEMPLE SHIR TIKVA: $1,000 · OtherTEMPLE SHIR TIKVAUMASS MEDICAL SCHOOL: $1,000 · OtherUMASS MEDICAL SCHOOLTEMPLE EMANUEL: $884 · OtherTEMPLE EMANUELHOAGLUND FOUNDATION: $500 · Other+10 more: $1,397 · Other+10 moreJEWISH HEALTHCARE CENTER INC: $6,399 · HealthJEWISH HEALTH…+3 more: $143 · HealthFLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $500 · EducationWORCESTER ACADEMY: $250 · EducationPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $200 · Education+1 more: $25 · EducationAMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: $35 · InternationalHospice of Palm Beach County Inc: $25 · Human Services
Philanthropy$30,834Other$14,937Health$6,542Education$975International$35Human Services$25

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 budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF CENTRAL MASSACHUSETTS INC: $20,816 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INC: $10,018 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH HEALTHCARE CENTER INC: $6,399 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetFLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWORCESTER ACADEMY: $250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHILD NEUROLOGY EDUCATION AND RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDANA-FARBER INC: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: $35 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDREN'S TUMOR FOUNDATION: $25 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHospice of Palm Beach County Inc: $25 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWILLIAM JAMES COLLEGE INC: $25 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDAUGHTERS OF MIRIAM CENTER: $18 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.

Combined Jewish Phila…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston IncMA13.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Glick Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Glick Charitable Foundation. 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%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
  • Jewish Healthcare Center Inc: 15% of income from government
  • William James College Inc: 11% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% 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
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
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 Glick Charitable Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Glick Charitable 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 27 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Glick’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