Skip to content
Lachman Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Lachman 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.

$27k
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$7k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

Arts & Culture$108kEnvironment$95kPhilanthropy$45kReligion$39kPublic Benefit$30kHealth$21kRecreation & Sports$5kEducation$3kOther$0
02FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$715
Median grant
2
States reached
$424k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JEWISH UNITED FUND$7,200
CONGREGATION BETH SHALOM$5,630
RAVINIA FESTIVAL$5,000
CHICAGO BOTANIC GARDEN$5,000
Rett Syndrome Research Trust$900
Helping Hands Network$800
IL Holocaust MuseumEducation Center$715
Holiday Heroes$500
AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY$460
WTTW-11$150
KESHET$118
PAWS Chicago$100
Individual grant recipient$30
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 (FY18–19, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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%JCC Chicago: $72 → 14%JCC Chicago: $45 → 14%Clearbrook: $1k → 14%Clearbrook: $825 → 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

WA
IL
NY
MA
NJ
CT
TN
DC
GA
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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$330k · 26 repeat orgs$43k to everyone else

26 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2024, 14 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
47

Total granted

$330k
$42k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+34%
+35%

Still filing today

50%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $500 went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthArts & CulturePhilanthropyEducationHuman 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

  • RAVINIA FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION
    7× · 2018–2024 · $97k · revenue +50%
  • CH
    CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY
    6× · 2018–2024 · $95k · revenue +38%
  • JU
    JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO
    7× · 2018–2024 · $45k · revenue +34%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $18k
  • U
    USTA
    one grant, 2018 · $4k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $4k
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
Gastro Intestinal Research Foundation Inc

The GI Research Foundation works to treat, prevent, and cure digestive diseases. In collaboration with the physicians and scientists at the University of Chicago Digestive Diseases Center, we fund innovative clinical and laboratory…

Health
2
Chicago Center for Jewish Genetic Disorders

The norton & elaine sarnoff center for jewish genetics (the center) is an educational resource for hereditary cancers and jewish genetic disorders. working closely with clergy, health care professionals, support organizations and dedicated…

Health
3
Samuel Waxman Cancer Research Foundation

The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…

—
4
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
5
American Academy of Neurology

The Academy's mission is to enhance member career fulfillment and promote brain health for all.

Community Improvement
6
Leonard and Diane Sherman Family Foundation

The foundation is organized to foster, promote, support, develop, encourage and maintain the broad charitable, educational and/or religious purpose of, the jewish federation of metropolitan chicago, and the foundation as authorized in…

Philanthropy
7
The Jewish Museum

The mission of the jewish museum is to collect, preserve, exhibit and interpret art and jewish culture. see schedule o for more information.

Arts & Culture
8
Asco Association

Asco association promotes the common business interests of its members by: (1) advocating for policies that improve the quality of cancer care; (2) maintaining the highest standards of oncology medical care through programs supporting…

Community Improvement
9
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
10
City of Hope

City of Hope's mission is to make hope a reality for all touched by cancer and diabetes. PLEASE SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A CONTINUATION OF OUR MISSION

Health
11
Society for Neuroscience

Sfn's mission is to: 1. advance the understanding of the brain and the nervous system by bringing together scientists of all segments of neuroscience, by facilitating the integration of research directed at all levels of biological…

Health
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chicago Horticultural Society; the most unlike its peers is Helping Hands Network 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

35 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. 35 of the 75 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
34/35
Grantees still filing
25/35
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONGREGATION BETH SHALOM: $33,385 · OtherCONGREGATION BETH SHALOMJohn F Kennedy Presidential Library: $30,000 · OtherJohn F Kennedy Presidential LibraryIndividual grant recipient: $18,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIL Holocaust MuseumEducation Center: $4,745 · OtherUSTA: $4,300 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $4,000 · OtherTHE JEWISH POCET: $4,000 · Other+46 more: $20,509 · Other+46 moreRAVINIA FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION: $96,500 · Arts & CultureRAVINIA FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION+3 more: $710 · Arts & CultureCHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: $95,250 · EnvironmentCHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIET…JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $44,890 · PhilanthropyJEWISH UNITED…+2 more: $200 · PhilanthropyRETT SYNDROME RESEARCH TRUST INC: $4,950 · HealthCANCER WELLNESS CENTER: $2,060 · HealthNATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY: $1,575 · HealthAmerican Diabetes Association: $500 · HealthTHE HOLIDAY HEROES FOUNDATION INC: $500 · Health+5 more: $1,018 · HealthUniversity of Illinois Foundation: $2,000 · EducationTHE ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO: $575 · EducationCOLLEGE BOUND OPPORTUNITIES: $500 · EducationHELPING HANDS NETWORK INC: $2,286 · Youth Development
Other$118,939Arts & Culture$97,210Environment$95,250Philanthropy$45,090Health$10,603Education$3,075Youth Development$2,286

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 budgetRAVINIA FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION: $96,500 over 7y, 0.4% of budgetCHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: $95,250 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $44,890 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetRETT SYNDROME RESEARCH TRUST INC: $4,950 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE JEWISH POCET: $4,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetHELPING HANDS NETWORK INC: $2,286 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetCANCER WELLNESS CENTER: $2,060 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Illinois Foundation: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCLEARBROOK: $1,925 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY: $1,575 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetKESHET: $918 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPAWS CHICAGO: $680 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO: $575 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Diabetes Association: $500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE HOLIDAY HEROES FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCOLLEGE BOUND OPPORTUNITIES: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetISRAEL CANCER RESEARCH FUND INC: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetChicago Architecture Foundation: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDYSAUTONOMIA FOUNDATION INC DBA FAMILIAL DYSAUTONOMIA FOUNDATION: $288 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetChicago Humanities Festival: $160 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJewish Community Centers of Chicago: $117 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMichael Rolfe Pancreatic Cancer Foundation: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSharsheret Inc: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHAVE DREAMS: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSUSAN F LASKY CANCER FOUNDATION: $100 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetFOR AUTISTIC KIDS FOUNDATION: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $62 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJewish Women International: $25 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 RAVINIA FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO ↗
  • Who funds RETT SYNDROME RESEARCH TRUST INC ↗
  • Who funds THE JEWISH POCET ↗
  • Who funds HELPING HANDS NETWORK INC ↗
  • Who funds CANCER WELLNESS CENTER ↗
  • Who funds University of Illinois Foundation ↗
  • Who funds CLEARBROOK ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds KESHET ↗
  • Who funds PAWS CHICAGO ↗
  • Who funds THE ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO ↗
  • Who funds American Diabetes Association ↗
  • Who funds THE HOLIDAY HEROES FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds COLLEGE BOUND OPPORTUNITIES ↗
  • Who funds ISRAEL CANCER RESEARCH FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds Chicago Architecture Foundation ↗

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 Federation of …Circle of Service Fou…AbbVie FoundationThe Bill Bass Foundat…First Bank Chicago Fo…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Gendell Family Founda…Hochberg Family Found…The Chicago Community…National Philanthropi…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Baird Foundation Inc
Jewish Federation of Metropolitan ChicagoIL25.3× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · Circle of Service Foundation · AbbVie Foundation · The Bill Bass Foundation · First Bank Chicago Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Gendell Family Foundation · Hochberg Family Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · National Philanthropic Trust · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Baird Foundation Inc

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 Lachman Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lachman 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%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 4%
  • Sharsheret Inc: 4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 75 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 Lachman’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