Skip to content
Icl Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Icl Foundation

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.

$10k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$6k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Human Services$11kFood & Nutrition$11kRecreation & Sports$8kInternational$2kReligion$1kHealth$650Animals$150Public Safety & Disaster$100Other$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$3,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$157k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Backpacks of Love$6,316
USMX ILA Golf Outing$3,000
Individual grant recipient$484
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 (FY24–25, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%4Heroes Charity: $100 → 8%Backpacks of Love: $6k → 6%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 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
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
2
Jack Gives Back Foundation
Philanthropy
3
The Jack Roth Charitable Foundation
Philanthropy
4
Hopper-Belmont Foundation

Cancer research support

Science & Tech
5
Lehigh Valley Hospital

Our mission is to heal, comfort and care for the people of our community by providing advanced and compassionate health care of superior quality and value, supported by education and research.

Health
6
The Johns Hopkins Hospital

For more than 125 years, the mission of the johns hopkins hospital has been to lead the world in the diagnosis and treatment of disease and to train tomorrow's great physicians, nurses and scientists. above all, we aim to provide the…

Health
7
Richmond Memorial Health Foundation
Health
8
Foundation for Cardiovascular Research and Innovations
Philanthropy
9
Shoot Down Kids Cancer Foundation
Health
10
Global Heartcare Foundation
Health
11
The Jack Canine Foundation
—
12
Martha Jefferson Hospital

As part of sentara health's integrated delivery system, we improve health every day.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Richmond Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals; the most unlike its peers is 4HEROES Charity 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

9 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. 9 of the 16 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)
8/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

The John Quadrino Foundation: $10,000 · OtherThe John Quadrino FoundationTerra Cotta Golf Charity: $3,000 · OtherTerra Cotta Golf CharityUSMX ILA Golf Outing: $3,000 · OtherUSMX ILA Golf OutingThe International Seamens Center: $1,500 · OtherThe International Seamens CenterSEAMENS CHURCH INSTITUTE INC: $1,000 · OtherSalvation Army of Central VA: $928 · Other+2 more: $984 · OtherBACKPACKS OF LOVE INC: $6,316 · Human ServicesBACKPACKS OF LOVE INC+1 more: $100 · Human ServicesFEED MORE INC: $4,464 · Food & NutritionFEED MORE INCTERRA COTTA GOLF CHARITIES INC: $1,500 · Recreation & SportsAmerican Heart Association Inc: $500 · HealthJOHN RANDOLPH FOUNDATION INC: $100 · HealthST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $50 · HealthRICHMOND SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $150 · Animals
Other$20,412Human Services$6,416Food & Nutrition$4,464Recreation & Sports$1,500Health$650Animals$150

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetThe John Quadrino Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetFEED MORE INC: $4,464 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTERRA COTTA GOLF CHARITIES INC: $1,500 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRICHMOND SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $150 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJOHN RANDOLPH FOUNDATION INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $50 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Icl Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Icl Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s 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 · 0–10%
    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 16 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 Icl’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