Skip to content

· Private foundation

Hornik Family Foundation 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.

$83k
Granted FY2025still arriving
15
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Religion$270kEducation$39kFood & Nutrition$29kPhilanthropy$25kHealth$23kArts & Culture$16kPublic Safety & Disaster$15kEnvironment$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k14 grants · $68k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
$5,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$2.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JCC Chicago$15,000
Congregation Ohev Shalom$9,545
Jewish Federation of Bluegrass$6,500
Ohavay Zion Congregation$5,943
Art Over Hate Collective$5,400
Monterey Peninsula College$5,376
Temple of Aaron$5,000
Tamid Group$5,000
American Friends of Leket Israel$5,000
Institute for Regional Conservation$5,000
Congregation Beth Israel$4,532
Congregation Beth Evergreen$3,500
Kids In Namibia Deserve Love Enco$2,500
The Jewish Pavilion of Central Flor$2,500
Individual grant recipient$2,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–25, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, 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%The Jewish Pavilion of Central Flor: $3k → 11%JCC Chicago: $15k → 14%The Jewish Pavilion of Central Flor: $3k → 11%The Jewish Pavilion of Central Flor: $3k → 11%The Jewish Pavillion of Central Florida: $2k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

MN
IL
WI
NY
MA
PA
NJ
CA
CO
KY
MD
GA
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.

69%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$312k · 17 repeat orgs$143k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +75% since the first grant, against -8% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
28

Total granted

$312k
$110k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+75%
-8%

Still filing today

35%
21%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 56% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $33k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’20’21’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’20’21’24’25
PhilanthropyHuman ServicesPublic Safety & DisasterHealthArts & CultureReligionOther
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

  • MH
    MINNESOTA HILLEL
    5× · 2017–2023 · $28k · revenue +95%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET ISRAEL INC
    7× · 2017–2025 · $27k · revenue +169%
  • NJ
    NECHAMA - JEWISH RESPONSE TO DISASTER
    2× · 2017–2018 · $15k · revenue +24%

Funded once

  • AI
    AMERICA ISRAEL DEMOCRACY COALITION
    one grant, 2024 · $13k
  • MU
    McGill University
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • HD
    Hileicher Day School
    2× · 2023–2024 · $8k
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
University of Judaism Foundation
—
2
The University of Iowa Louis Shulman Hillel Foundation

The mission of Iowa Hillel is to enhance the lives of Jewish students at the University of Iowa, so they may enrich the Jewish people and the world. Iowa Hillel envisions a world for our students where they find a community here at Iowa…

—
3
University of Southern California Hillel Foundation

To create an informed, celebratory and satisfying jewish community for students at the university of southern california, to deepen jewish identity through social, intellectual and spiritual participation, to offer diversified…

—
4
Hillel Foundation for Jewish Life at the University of Washington

The mission of Hillel at the University of Washington (Hillel UW) is to inspire students and young adults (ages 18-35) to explore, embrace, and celebrate Jewish life and identity.

—
5
Hillel Foundation at Miami University

Hillel at Miami University, the center of Jewish life on campus, seeks to engage, connect, and empower students to explore their Jewish identity creating a vibrant Jewish community and inspiring the next generation of Jewish leaders.

—
6
American University Hillel Inc

To enrich the lives of Jewish students so that they may enrich the Jewish people and the world.

—
7
Sherit Isroel
—
8
Hillel the Foundation for Jewish Campus Life

KU Hillel's mission is to connect Jewish students to each other and to their Judaism, to inspire and equip the next generation of Jewish leaders, and to build a thriving Jewish community on campus.

—
9
Hillel the Foundation for Jewish Campus Life

Hillel of Colorado seeks to engage, empower, and work with Jewish college students to create Jewish communities at University of Denver, Colorado State University, Auraria Campus, Colorado School of Mines and other front range…

—
10
Hillel 818

Hillel 818 is the campus hub for all things Jewish at Cal State Northridge, Pierce College, LA Valley College, and throughout the San Fernando Valley. We empower our 6,000+ Jewish students to forge lasting friendships, grow as leaders,…

—
11
The Jerusalem Connection
—
12
Hillel At Florida International University

Enrich the lives of jewish students

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Federation of the Bluegrass Inc; the most unlike its peers is Blood Cancer United 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

19 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. 19 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
11/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONGREGATION OHEV SHALOM INC: $78,385 · OtherCONGREGATION OHEV SHALOM INCBETH JACOB CONGREGATION: $36,000 · OtherBETH JACOB CONGREGATIONCongregation Beth Israel: $31,521 · OtherCongregation Beth IsraelMINNESOTA HILLEL: $27,665 · OtherMINNESOTA HILLELTamid Group: $18,849 · OtherThe ARK: $14,233 · Other+36 more: $159,918 · Other+36 moreAMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET ISRAEL INC: $27,000 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN FRI…AMERICA ISRAEL DEMOCRACY COALITION: $12,821 · PhilanthropyAMERICA ISRA…JEWISH FEDERATION OF THE BLUEGRASS INC: $12,500 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDER…Jewish Community Centers of Chicago: $15,000 · Human ServicesTHE JEWISH PAVILION OF CENTRAL FLORIDA INC: $9,800 · Human ServicesNECHAMA - JEWISH RESPONSE TO DISASTER: $14,570 · Public Safety & DisasterFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $4,584 · Arts & CultureHILLEL FOUNDATION UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN INC: $2,849 · ReligionAL FRIENDS INC: $2,000 · Food & NutritionAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $400 · Health
Other$366,571Philanthropy$52,321Human Services$24,800Public Safety & Disaster$14,570Arts & Culture$4,584Religion$2,849Food & Nutrition$2,000Health$400

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMINNESOTA HILLEL: $27,665 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET ISRAEL INC: $27,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetJewish Community Centers of Chicago: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNECHAMA - JEWISH RESPONSE TO DISASTER: $14,570 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetAMERICA ISRAEL DEMOCRACY COALITION: $12,821 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF THE BLUEGRASS INC: $12,500 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetThe Inst for Regional Conservation: $10,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetTHE JEWISH PAVILION OF CENTRAL FLORIDA INC: $9,800 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $4,584 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSanta Cruz Hillel Foundation: $4,300 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetTHE TALMUD TORAH OF ST PAUL: $3,500 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetHILLEL FOUNDATION UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN INC: $2,849 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAL FRIENDS INC: $2,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $400 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 MINNESOTA HILLEL ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET ISRAEL INC ↗
  • Who funds Jewish Community Centers of Chicago ↗
  • Who funds NECHAMA - JEWISH RESPONSE TO DISASTER ↗
  • Who funds AMERICA ISRAEL DEMOCRACY COALITION ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF THE BLUEGRASS INC ↗
  • Who funds The Inst for Regional Conservation ↗
  • Who funds THE JEWISH PAVILION OF CENTRAL FLORIDA INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC ↗
  • Who funds Santa Cruz Hillel Foundation ↗
  • Who funds THE TALMUD TORAH OF ST PAUL ↗
  • Who funds HILLEL FOUNDATION UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN 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 Minneapolis FoundationMN11.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Minneapolis Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Hornik Family Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Hornik Family Foundation Inc. 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%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 35%
  • The Inst for Regional Conservation: 35% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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 Hornik Family Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Hornik Family Foundation Inc 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 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Hornik Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph