Skip to content
Kaplan Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Kaplan Foundation

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.

$3.3M
Granted FY2024still arriving
14
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
States reached
$3.3M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

99% of Kaplan Foundation’s FY2024 grant dollars went to The Chicago Community Trust, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 11 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Organizations named directly on the return

7
’17
7
’18
9
’19
7
’20
5
’21
3
’22
8
’23
11
’24

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

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 2024.

Philanthropy$10MEducation$55kReligion$29kHealth$24kInternational$22kArts & Culture$15kHuman Services$10kFood & Nutrition$5kOther$0
02FY2024 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k12 grants · $22k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $250k+1 grant · $3.3M
$2,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$13M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHICAGO COMMUNITY TRUST$3,300,000
PARK AVENUE SYNAGOGUE$10,010
CONGREGATION BETH SHALOM$5,500
ALZHEIMER'S ASSOCIATION OF ILLINOIS$3,000
FOUNDATION FIGHTING BLINDNESS$2,500
NORTHMOOR EDUCATION FOUNDATION$2,000
BOCA RIO FOUNDATION$2,000
HEALTHNETWORK FOUNDATION$2,000
BOCA RATON JEWISH FILM FESTIVAL$1,500
MORE LYFE FOUNDATION$1,000
ISRAEL TENNIS & EDUCATION CENTERS FOUNDATION$1,000
CANCER WELLNESS CENTER$500
SHE CAN$500
NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN$500
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 (FY18–24, $18k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%MORE LYFE FOUNDATION: $1k → 12%CARIDAD CENTER: $1k → 11%ST LOUIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $2k → 11%HEALTHNETWORK FOUNDATION: $2k → 17%ADOLPH AND ROSE LEVIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $3k → 11%HEALTHNETWORK FOUNDATION: $2k → 17%ADOLPH & ROSE LEVIS JEWISH COMMUNITY: $3k → 11%HEALTHNETWORK FOUNDATION: $2k → 17%ADOLPH AND ROSE LEVIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $2k → 11%CRADLES TO CRAYONS: $1k → 14%CRADLES TO CRAYONS: $500 → 14%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
NY
MA
OH
CA
CO
MO
VA
MD
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.

51%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$91k · 12 repeat orgs$88k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +54% since the first grant, against +27% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
21

Total granted

$91k
$83k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+54%
+27%

Still filing today

75%
52%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k 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
Human ServicesEducationArts & CultureHealthInternationalPhilanthropyOther
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

  • IE
    ISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE
    4× · 2017–2021 · $14k · revenue +122%
  • THE FOUNDATION FIGHTING BLINDNESS INC
    6× · 2017–2024 · $12k · revenue +49%
  • IT
    ISRAEL TENNIS CENTERS FOUNDATION INC
    7× · 2017–2024 · $8k · revenue +37%

Funded once

  • IN
    ILLINOIS NETWORK OF CHARTER SCHOOLSgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $50k · revenue +56%
  • RAVINIA FESTIVAL ASSOCIATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $7k · revenue +251%
  • FA
    FOOD ALLERGY RESEARCH & EDUCATION INC
    one grant, 2019 · $5k · revenue -34%
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
National Opinion Research Center

See schedule onorc at the university of chicago conducts research and data science on critical societal issues to guide decision-making and the development of programs and public policy. our experts identify relationships and trends, and…

Social Science
2
Jewish Family and Children's Service of Minneapolis

Jewish family and children's service of minneapolis provides essential services to people of all ages and backgrounds to sustain healthy relationships, ease suffering and offer support in times of need.

Human Services
3
Jewish Community Relations Council

The jewish community relations council (jcrc) works within the jewish and broader communities in st. louis to enhance cooperation with other religious, racial, ethnic and civic groups; foster a just, democratic and pluralistic society; and…

Community Improvement
4
Minnesota Jewish Community Center

The minnesota jcc is dedicated to strengthening our community by providing inclusive programs that inspire personal growth, foster connection, and promote well-being through arts, culture, education, fitness, early childhood, day camp and…

—
5
Jews of Color Initiative

The Jews of Color Initiatives mission is to advance racial equity in the U.S. Jewish community by centering the leadership of Jews of Color and ensuring that our communities and institutions reflect the multiracial reality of the Jewish…

Civil Rights
6
Jewish Family and Children's Service Inc

Strengthening the community by providing behavioral health, healthcare and social services to all ages, faiths and backgrounds.

Human Services
7
Jewish Federation Council of Greater La

Based on jewish values, the jewish federation of greater los angeles convenes and leads the community and leverages its resources to assure the continuity of the jewish people, support a secure state of israel, care for jews in need here…

Philanthropy
8
Metropolitan Jewish Health System Inc

Mjhs health system is a charitable not-for-profit established to support the activities of affiliated organizations. mjhs is built on the core values of compassion, dignity and respect, first established by the four brooklyn ladies in…

Health
9
American Jewish Committee

AJC's mission is to enhance the wellbeing of the Jewish people and Israel, and to advance human rights and democratic values in the United States and around the world. In pursuit of this mission, AJC advances democratic principles, fights…

Civil Rights
10
Minnesota Jewish Community Center Foundation

The minnesota jcc foundation's sole purpose is to support the minnesota jcc.

Human Services
11
National Jewish Policy Center

To conduct educational activities and to provide scholarly perspectives on foreign and domestic policies that impact the jewish community in the united states and the broader american public.

International
12
Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington

As the central community relations agency of the organized jewish community in our nation's capital, the jcrc of greater washington endeavors to foster a society based on freedom, justice and democratic pluralism for it is such a society…

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Council of Jewish Women Incorporated; the most unlike its peers is More Lyfe Foundation. 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

25 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. 25 of the 39 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)
24/25
Grantees still filing
20/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

The Chicago Community Trust: $10,212,470 · PhilanthropyThe Chicago Community Trust+1 more: $6,000 · PhilanthropyILLINOIS NETWORK OF CHARTER SCHOOLS: $50,000 · EducationThe Northmoor Education Foundation: $4,000 · Education+2 more: $650 · EducationCONGREGATION BETH SHALOM: $15,510 · OtherPARK AVENUE SYNAGOGUE INC: $13,510 · OtherBOCA RATON JEWISH FILM FESTIVAL: $4,500 · OtherALZHEIMER'S ASSOCIATION OF ILLINOIS: $3,000 · OtherJDC: $2,288 · OtherJAFCO: $2,000 · OtherThe Unicorn Childrens Foundation: $2,000 · OtherFOOD ALLERGY RESEARCH & EDUCATION INC: $5,000 · OtherMDRC: $2,000 · Other+9 more: $6,575 · OtherISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE: $13,750 · InternationalISRAEL TENNIS CENTERS FOUNDATION INC: $8,220 · InternationalADOLPH & ROSE LEVIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $6,500 · Human ServicesHEALTHNETWORK FOUNDATION FKA HEALTH NET FOUNDATION INC: $6,000 · Human ServicesJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $1,500 · Human ServicesCRADLES TO CRAYONS INC: $1,500 · Human ServicesMORE LYFE FOUNDATION: $1,000 · Human ServicesCaridad Center Inc: $1,000 · Human ServicesTHE FOUNDATION FIGHTING BLINDNESS INC: $11,500 · HealthTHE JOSSELYN CENTER NFP: $1,000 · HealthCANCER WELLNESS CENTER: $500 · HealthRAVINIA FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION: $7,000 · Arts & CultureJEWISH BOOK COUNCIL INC: $1,800 · Arts & CultureFACING HISTORY & OURSELVES INC: $1,000 · Arts & Culture+1 more: $130 · Arts & Culture
Philanthropy$10,218,470Education$54,650Other$56,383International$21,970Human Services$17,500Health$13,000Arts & Culture$9,930

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 budgetThe Chicago Community Trust: $10,212,470 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetILLINOIS NETWORK OF CHARTER SCHOOLS: $50,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE: $13,750 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE FOUNDATION FIGHTING BLINDNESS INC: $11,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetISRAEL TENNIS CENTERS FOUNDATION INC: $8,220 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetRAVINIA FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION: $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetADOLPH & ROSE LEVIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $6,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBOCA RIO FOUNDATION INC: $6,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetHEALTHNETWORK FOUNDATION FKA HEALTH NET FOUNDATION INC: $6,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFOOD ALLERGY RESEARCH & EDUCATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Northmoor Education Foundation: $4,000 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetThe Unicorn Childrens Foundation: $2,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMDRC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH BOOK COUNCIL INC: $1,800 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCRADLES TO CRAYONS INC: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFACING HISTORY & OURSELVES INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE JOSSELYN CENTER NFP: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCaridad Center Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSHE-CAN GLOBAL INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCANCER WELLNESS CENTER: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN INCORPORATED: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO: $150 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCultural Council of Palm Beach County Inc: $130 over 2y, 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

American Endowment Fo…National Philanthropi…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
American Endowment FoundationOH8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Kaplan Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Kaplan Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Cradles to Crayons Inc: 2% of income from government
  • Caridad Center Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get 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
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 Kaplan Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Kaplan Foundation 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 39 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 Kaplan’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