Skip to content
Joseph and Paulina Farivar Educational Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Joseph and Paulina Farivar Educational 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.

$39k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$27k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$458kEducation$114kYouth Development$54kEmployment$42kHuman Services$40kArts & Culture$26kCivil Rights$26kHousing & Shelter$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $27k
$5,300
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VALLEY TORAH HIGH SCHOOL$26,750
YACHAD KOLLEL AND OUTREACH CENTER$5,300
TC CHILLEMI FOUNDATION INC$5,000
TASHBAR SEPHARDIC YESHIVA KETANA$1,800
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 (FY22–25, $32k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%TC CHILLEMI FOUNDATION INC: $17k → 10%TC CHILLEMI FOUNDATION INC: $5k → 10%TC CHILLEMI FOUNDATION INC: $5k → 10%TC CHILLEMI FOUNDATION INC: $5k → 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
IN
CA
KY
SC
DC
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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$674k · 16 repeat orgs$101k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +53% since the first grant, against +21% for those funded once.

16 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
17

Total granted

$674k
$101k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+53%
+21%

Still filing today

38%
35%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
ReligionEducationPhilanthropyCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • JF
    JD Finish Line Foundation Inc
    3× · 2017–2019 · $53k · revenue +141%
  • HY
    HACHAM YADIDIA SHOFET EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION
    5× · 2018–2024 · $50k · revenue +8% · 58% of their budget
  • TC
    TC CHILLEMI FOUNDATION INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $32k · revenue +53%

Funded once

  • AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEEgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue +111%
  • TU
    The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
    one grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue +21%
  • TF
    THE FOUNDATION FOR SEPHARDIC CAMP
    one grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue +1%
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
Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary

To prepare students for the rabbinate and to issue the traditional certificate of ordination in connection therewith. the seminary is authorized to confer the degree of master of hebrew literature (m.h.l.), doctor of hebrew literature…

Education
2
University of Judaism Foundation
—
3
Yeshiva University

The university is composed of several colleges and schools providing undergraduate, graduate, professional and post-doctoral education and training and research and clinical programs.

Education
4
The Steinhardt Foundation for Jewish Life Inc
Religion
5
Greater Miami Hillel Foundation Inc

The mission of the organization is to enrich the lives of jewish undergraduate and graduate students so that they may enrich the jewish people and the world.

—
6
Foundation for Conservative Judiasm of South Florida
—
7
Yad Yosef Foundation
Philanthropy
8
Tal Hashamayim Foundation
Religion
9
Weitzman National Museum of American Jewish History

The weitzman national museum of american jewish history, on independence mall in philadelphia, presents educational programs and experiences that preserve, explore, and celebrate the history of jews in america. its purpose is to connect…

Arts & Culture
10
Tzemach Yifroch Foundation
—
11
The Chasdei Shimon Foundation
Religion
12
Redlich Horwitz Foundation
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Jewish Committee; the most unlike its peers is Jd Finish Line Foundation 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

12 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. 12 of the 33 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
10/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

EMEK HEBREW DAY SCHOOL: $197,186 · OtherEMEK HEBREW DAY SCHOOLSAN FERNANDO VALLEY HEBREW HIGH SCHOOL VALLEY TORAH HIGH SCHOOL: $146,750 · OtherSAN FERNANDO VALLEY HEBREW HIGH SCHOOL VALLEY TORAH HIGH SCHOOLYACHAD KOLLEL AND OUTREACH CENTER: $45,500 · OtherYACHAD KOLLEL AND OUTREACH CENTERHIDDUSH: $25,000 · Other+21 more: $96,308 · Other+21 moreHACHAM YADIDIA SHOFET EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $50,000 · ReligionHACHAM YADID…HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $22,500 · ReligionHILLEL THE F…THE FOUNDATION FOR SEPHARDIC CAMP: $15,000 · ReligionTHE FOUNDATI…JD Finish Line Foundation Inc: $53,100 · PhilanthropyTWO TEN FOOTWEAR FOUNDATION INC: $42,000 · Community ImprovementTC CHILLEMI FOUNDATION INC: $32,000 · Human ServicesAMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE: $25,000 · Civil RightsThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $25,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$510,744Religion$87,500Philanthropy$53,100Community Improvement$42,000Human Services$32,000Civil Rights$25,000Arts & Culture$25,000

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 budgetHACHAM YADIDIA SHOFET EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 5y, 58% of budgetTWO TEN FOOTWEAR FOUNDATION INC: $42,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetTC CHILLEMI FOUNDATION INC: $32,000 over 4y, 17% of budgetAMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $22,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE FOUNDATION FOR SEPHARDIC CAMP: $15,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetYESHIVAS KESSER YONAH: $12,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF WARRICK COUNTY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetTENACITY INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE RONALD REAGAN PRESIDENTIAL FOUNDATION AND INSTITUTE: $75 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 JD Finish Line Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds HACHAM YADIDIA SHOFET EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds TWO TEN FOOTWEAR FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds TC CHILLEMI FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE ↗
  • Who funds The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ↗
  • Who funds HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE ↗
  • Who funds THE FOUNDATION FOR SEPHARDIC CAMP ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVAS KESSER YONAH ↗
  • Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF WARRICK COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds TENACITY INC ↗
  • Who funds THE RONALD REAGAN PRESIDENTIAL FOUNDATION AND INSTITUTE ↗

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.

Jewish Community Foun…Jewish Federation Cou…Renaissance Charitabl…Raymond James Charita…Morgan Stanley Global…Donor Advised Charita…National Philanthropi…Fidelity Investments …Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
Jewish Community Foundation of Los AngelesCA22.8× affinity9 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Jewish Federation Council of Greater La · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Joseph and Paulina Farivar Educational Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Joseph and Paulina Farivar Educational Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    4report 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.

    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 33 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 Joseph and Paulina Farivar Educational’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