Skip to content

· Private foundation

Hoffman Family Charitable Trust

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$522k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$498k
Largest
01What it funds
0170% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Religion$659kInternational$2kEducation$1kHealth$542Philanthropy$360Human Services$300Other$0
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $24k
  • $250k+1 grant · $498k
$498,007
Median grant
1
States reached
$9.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$498,007
Individual grant recipient$24,245
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 (FY20–20, $300) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%MISASKIM: $300 → 20%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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.9M · 21 repeat orgs$386k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +51% since the first grant, against +46% for those funded once.

21 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 20 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
31

Total granted

$1.9M
$386k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+51%
+46%

Still filing today

19%
10%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalPhilanthropyHealthReligionHuman 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

  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA DMIR INC
    3× · 2019–2021 · $1k · revenue +51%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF PROJECT RAANANA
    2× · 2020–2021 · $860 · revenue +110%
  • CL
    CHAI LIFELINE INC
    3× · 2019–2021 · $542 · revenue +38%

Funded once

  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BE'ER HATORAH
    one grant, 2019 · $100k
  • BM
    BETH MEDRASH GOVOHA ERETZ YISROEL
    one grant, 2019 · $65k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $50k
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
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
2
Friends of Yeshiva Chofetz Chaim Kolel - Israel

Fundraising for educational institutions.

—
3
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
4
American Friends of Even Yisroel Charitable Foundation
Philanthropy
5
American Friends of Birchas Mordechai

Raise funds for charitable purposes

Religion
6
American Friends of Amshinover Yeshiva Jerusalem Inc

Support of religious schools in Israel

International
7
Friends of Nir Kiryat Arba

To promote the study of torah

Religion
8
Cry for Zion

Ministry of the Gospel and the support for the Jewish State of Israel.

Religion
9
American Friends of Yeshivat Tifere Mordechai Inc

We make grants to support jewish religous education

Education
10
Mishken Chaim Rivnits

Assistance to the indigent

Religion
11
Zichroin Rabbeini Meshilem Feiish Ztl Foundation
—
12
Friends of Choshen Mishpat

To foster, promote and advance torah study and practice

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Friends of Yeshiva Dmir Inc; the most unlike its peers is Friends of Project Raanana. 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

8 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. 8 of the 52 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $1,434,779 · OtherIndividual grant recipientRABBINICAL COLLEGE OHR SHIMON YISROEL: $195,000 · OtherRABBINICAL COLLEGE OHR SHIMON YISROELAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BE'ER HATORAH: $100,000 · OtherBETH MEDROSH GOHOVA OF ISRAEL: $99,000 · Other+40 more: $431,399 · Other+40 moreFriends of Ohr Moshe Inc: $3,000 · PhilanthropyYTTMTL INC: $360 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA DMIR INC: $1,410 · InternationalFRIENDS OF PROJECT RAANANA: $860 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVAS TORAS MOSHE: $250 · InternationalNER GAVRIEL FUND INC: $2,000 · ReligionCHAI LIFELINE INC: $542 · HealthMISASKIM CORP: $300 · Human Services
Other$2,260,178Philanthropy$3,360International$2,520Religion$2,000Health$542Human Services$300

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNER GAVRIEL FUND INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA DMIR INC: $1,410 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF PROJECT RAANANA: $860 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $542 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMISASKIM CORP: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVAS TORAS MOSHE: $250 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 Friends of Ohr Moshe Inc ↗
  • Who funds NER GAVRIEL FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA DMIR INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF PROJECT RAANANA ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗

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 Ojc FundNY22.2× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · The Fishoff Family Foundation · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · National Society for Hebrew Day Schools · Donors Fund Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Hoffman Family Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Hoffman Family Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 52 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.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Hoffman Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph