Skip to content
Karp Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Karp Family 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.

$158k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$30k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0184% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Education$600kEnvironment$200kHealth$170kSocial Science$100kYouth Development$90kRecreation & Sports$73kArts & Culture$70kAnimals$64kOther$0
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 7 grants below total $115,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $158,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $43,000 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $110k
$10,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$231k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Loomis Institute$30,000
Friends of the Israel Defense Forces$25,000
The Grand Council of the Eagle and Condor$25,000
Eat Real Certified, Inc.$10,000
Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania$10,000
Dell Children's Medical Center Foundation$10,000
Good + Foundation$5,000
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 (FY19–19, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, 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%Hospice Austin: $2k → 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.
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.

23%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$352k · 7 repeat orgs$1.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +60% since the first grant, against +30% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
17

Total granted

$352k
$1.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+60%
+30%

Still filing today

86%
59%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 38% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $65k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’23’24
EducationHealthArts & CultureRecreation & SportsHuman ServicesAnimalsOther
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

  • TL
    THE LOOMIS INSTITUTE D/B/A THE LOOMIS CHAFFEE SCHOOL
    2× · 2017–2024 · $85k · revenue +17%
  • USTA FOUNDATION INCORPORATED
    3× · 2017–2023 · $60k · revenue +60%
  • REWILD
    2× · 2018–2019 · $39k · revenue +236%

Funded once

  • TO
    TRUSTEES OF UNIVERSITY OF PA
    one grant, 2018 · $440k
  • FM
    FAO Multidisciplinary Assoc
    one grant, 2023 · $200k
  • HA
    Healing Advocacy Fund
    one grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue +5%
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
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
2
Albert Einstein College of Medicine

Committed to exceptional healthcare quality for all and actively engaged with our community, einstein drives scientific discovery and educates compassionate leaders in health and science.

Education
3
Institute for Protein Innovation Inc

The institute for protein innovation is advancing protein science to accelerate research and improve human health.

Health
4
Silicon Schools Fund Inc

The mission of the silicon schools fund is to improve education through supporting the launch of excellent new schools, improving academic instruction in existing schools, and by funding some of the boldest innovations in education…

Education
5
United States Naval Institute

Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.

—
6
The Rand Corporation

Help improve policy and decision making through research and analysis.

Public Benefit
7
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
8
New York School of Interior Design

New york school of interior design provides the most innovative, immersive, and transformative interior design education in the world, demonstrating the impact of professionally designed interiors on the health, happiness, and well-being…

Education
9
Boston Architectural College

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

—
10
Seattle Biomedical Research Institute

We conduct fundamental infectious disease research to generate critical new knowledge about pathogens and their interactions with see schedule o for continuationhumans to enable the discovery and development of novel interventions,…

—
11
The Lieber Institute Inc

The mission of the institute is to translate basic genetic and molecular mechanisms of schizophrenia and related developmental brain disorders into clinical advances that change the lives of affected individuals. it is catalyzing a new…

Health
12
Manhattanville University

To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Dell Children's Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Friends of the Israel Defense Forces. 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

20 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. 20 of the 29 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)
20/20
Grantees still filing
13/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TRUSTEES OF UNIVERSITY OF PA: $440,000 · OtherTRUSTEES OF UNIVERSITY OF PAFAO Multidisciplinary Assoc: $200,000 · OtherFAO Multidisciplinary AssocTHE MILKEN INSTITUTE: $100,000 · OtherTHE MILKEN INSTITUTEIndividual grant recipient: $100,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientDELL CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $38,290 · Other+13 more: $174,931 · Other+13 moreTHE LOOMIS INSTITUTE D/B/A THE LOOMIS CHAFFEE SCHOOL: $85,000 · EducationEanes Education Foundation: $10,000 · EducationTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $10,000 · EducationTHE MAGELLAN SCHOOL: $5,000 · EducationHealing Advocacy Fund: $100,000 · Crime & LegalANDREW S RODDICK FOUNDATION INC: $89,500 · Youth DevelopmentUSTA FOUNDATION INCORPORATED: $59,685 · Recreation & SportsSERVE AND RETURN INC: $10,200 · Recreation & SportsNATIONAL MUSEUM OF MATHEMATICS: $50,000 · Arts & CultureINTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $5,000 · Arts & CultureREWILD: $39,350 · Animals
Other$1,053,221Education$110,000Crime & Legal$100,000Youth Development$89,500Recreation & Sports$69,885Arts & Culture$55,000Animals$39,350

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 budgetHealing Advocacy Fund: $100,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetTHE MILKEN INSTITUTE: $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetANDREW S RODDICK FOUNDATION INC: $89,500 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetTHE LOOMIS INSTITUTE D/B/A THE LOOMIS CHAFFEE SCHOOL: $85,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetUSTA FOUNDATION INCORPORATED: $59,685 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetNATIONAL MUSEUM OF MATHEMATICS: $50,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetREWILD: $39,350 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetDELL CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $38,290 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHILARITY FOR CHARITY INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSERVE AND RETURN INC: $10,200 over 2y, 9.1% of budgetEanes Education Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEat Real Certified Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGOOD PLUS FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE MAGELLAN SCHOOL: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBUSH TENNIS CENTER: $3,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetHOSPICE AUSTIN: $1,931 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…Vanguard Charitable E…The Blackbaud Giving …American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust IncIN13× affinity7 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Karp Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Karp Family Foundation. 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%1%3%4%5%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 · 0–5%
    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 Karp Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Karp Family 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 29 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.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $216k of grant expense with no grantee named in the published copy. A private foundation itemizes every grant it makes, so a return carrying none has filed its list as an attachment that the public copy does not include. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Karp Family’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