Skip to content
Itrek Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Itrek Inc

Itrek empowers leaders to engage their networks in meaningful israel experiences, fostering an understanding and appreciation of israel's unique culture, diversity, and complex reality, which they carry back into their own lives and leadership roles.

$1.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$141k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Education$644kInternational$141kScience & Tech$30kRecreation & Sports$26kReligion$14kOther$0
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $148,394, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,218,811 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,070,417 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $141k
$141,394
Median grant
2
States reached
$21M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ISRAEL TECH MISSION INC$141,394
CHABAD JEWISH STUDENT CENTER AT BERKELEY$7,000
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 (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 43% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 9%INSIDEIL: $244k → 7%MIT SLOAN SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT: $8k → 8%UC BERKELEY FOUNDATION: $27k → 10%UC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION - RADY SCHOOL: $7k → 11%ISRAEL TECH MISSION INC: $141k → 9%CORNELL TECH NY: $30k → 17%WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN ST LOUIS: $7k → 11%VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY: $5k → 14%JOHN CARROLL UNIVERSITY: $7k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON: $7k → 9%NORTHWESTERN PRITZKER SCHOOL OF LAW: $26k → 14%CENTER FOR JEWISH LIFEHILLEL PRINCETON UNIVERSITY: $7k → 11%UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA: $10k → 8%INSEAD: $21k → 13%INSIDEIL: $206k → 7%MIT SLOAN SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT: $6k → 8%CHABAD JEWISH STUDENT CENTER AT BERKELEY: $7k → 10%IMEFINSEAD: $12k → 9%CORNELL TECH: $30k → 17%NORTHWESTERN: $20k → 14%UVA LAW SCHOOL FOUNDATION: $10k → 8%UC BERKELEY LAW: $24k → 10%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

WA
IL
NY
MA
OH
NJ
CA
MO
VA
MD
TN
DC

Grants abroad, by region: $1.1M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$1.1M · 100% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: TO SUPPORT THE ORGANIZATION'S MISSION.

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 41% of Itrek Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 24% of the giving stays in NY; by stated purpose, 0%.

Itrek Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 2.5% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
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 New Haven

The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…

Education
2
President and Fellows of Harvard College

Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.

Education
3
Trustees of Dartmouth College

Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.

Education
4
The Trustees of Princeton University

Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…

Education
5
Trustees of Boston University

Organization's mission: boston university is an international, comprehensive, private research university, committed to educating students to be reflective, resourceful individuals ready to live, adapt, and lead in an interconnected world.…

—
6
Furman University

The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.

Education
7
University of Virginia Investment Management Company

The university of virginia investment management company (uvimco) is organized to invest funds on behalf of the rector and visitors of the university of virginia (the university or uva) and university-associated organizations (uaos).

Education
8
Lehigh University

The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…

Education
9
Boston Architectural College

The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.

—
10
Case Western Reserve University

Case Western Reserve University is an independent, research-oriented university with broadly based strengths in health, including medicine, nursing and dentistry; in engineering; in the arts and sciences; and in law, management and social…

Education
11
Carnegie Mellon University

To create a transformative educational experience for students focused on deep disciplinary knowledge; problem solving; leadership, communication and interpersonal skills; and personal health and well-being. to cultivate a transformative…

—
12
The George Washington University

The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northwestern University; the most unlike its peers is Insead North America Inc Co Odonoghue & Lamb CPAs Pllc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the 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 20 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)
10/11
Grantees still filing
9/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

INSIDEIL: $450,728 · OtherINSIDEILISRAEL TECH MISSION INC: $141,394 · OtherISRAEL TECH MISSION INCIndividual grant recipient: $30,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $24,044 · Other+5 more: $51,000 · Other+5 moreCornell University: $30,000 · EducationCornell Univers…UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY FOUNDATION: $27,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF C…ISRAEL ON CAMPUS COALITION INC: $22,500 · EducationISRAEL ON CAMPU…Massachusetts Institute of Technology: $13,525 · EducationMassachusetts I…UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA LAW SCHOOL FOUNDATION: $10,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF V…UC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION: $7,000 · EducationUC SAN DIEGO FO…John Carroll University: $7,000 · EducationJohn Carroll Un…Vanderbilt University: $5,392 · EducationINSEAD NORTH AMERICA INC CO ODONOGHUE & LAMB CPAs PLLC: $33,000 · InternationalNorthwestern University: $25,500 · Recreation & SportsJEWISH RUSSIAN CENTER INC: $7,000 · Religion
Other$697,166Education$122,417International$33,000Recreation & Sports$25,500Religion$7,000

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 budgetINSEAD NORTH AMERICA INC CO ODONOGHUE & LAMB CPAs PLLC: $33,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCornell University: $30,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY FOUNDATION: $27,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNorthwestern University: $25,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetISRAEL ON CAMPUS COALITION INC: $22,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $13,525 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA LAW SCHOOL FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION: $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJohn Carroll University: $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVanderbilt University: $5,392 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Itrek Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Itrek 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%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 35%
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology: 35% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 20 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 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 Itrek’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