Skip to content
Landowne & Bloom Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Landowne & Bloom Foundation Inc

Its FY2022 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$20k
Granted FY2022
1
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2022.

Religion$44kPhilanthropy$20kInternational$4kEducation$3kArts & Culture$2kCivil Rights$1kHealth$750Recreation & Sports$500Other$0
02FY2022 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$20,042
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Fidelity Charitable Gifts Funds$20,042
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 (FY17–19, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 46% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%BIKUR CHOLIM OF MIAMI BEACH: $360 → 15%NJY CAMPS: $500 → 16%RESPECTABILITY: $500 → 8%RESPECTABILITY: $500 → 8%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.

51%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$38k · 6 repeat orgs$36k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +96% since the first grant, against +39% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2022, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
20

Total granted

$38k
$16k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+96%
+39%

Still filing today

67%
65%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22
Arts & CultureHuman ServicesInternationalReligionEducationHealthOther
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

  • OT
    Ohr Torah Stone Institutions of Israel
    4× · 2017–2021 · $13k · revenue +96%
  • DB
    DISABILITY BELONGS
    2× · 2017–2019 · $1k · revenue +43%
  • CF
    Central Fund of Israel
    2× · 2018–2020 · $280 · revenue +145%

Funded once

  • TA
    TOWN AND VILLAGE SYNAGOGUE
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $3k
  • YU
    YESHIVA UNIVERSITYgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $3k · revenue +39%
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
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
2
University of Judaism Foundation
—
3
Eastern European Jewish Heritage Foundation
Philanthropy
4
Sherit Isroel
—
5
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
6
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
7
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
8
Yad Laniyim
Philanthropy
9
The Steinhardt Foundation for Jewish Life Inc
Religion
10
The Jerusalem Connection
—
11
National Council of Jewish Women Inc Jersey Hills Section
—
12
Yakar Foundation Inc
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles; the most unlike its peers is Metropolitan Museum of Art. 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

19 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. 19 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
14/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Fidelity Charitable Gifts Funds: $20,042 · OtherFidelity Charitable Gifts FundsLINCOLN SQUARE SYNAGOGUE INC: $16,550 · OtherLINCOLN SQUARE SYNAGOGUE INCCONGREGATION SHEARITH ISRAEL: $5,660 · OtherCONGREGATION SHEARITH ISRAELTOWN AND VILLAGE SYNAGOGUE: $2,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $2,500 · Other+5 more: $3,400 · Other+5 moreOhr Torah Stone Institutions of Israel: $13,000 · ReligionOhr Torah Stone Inst…NATIONAL JEWISH OUTREACH PROGRAM IN: $1,100 · ReligionNATIONAL JEWISH OUTR…PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $3,500 · PhilanthropyJEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF LOS ANGELES: $250 · PhilanthropyLAMDEINU INC: $180 · PhilanthropyYESHIVA UNIVERSITY: $2,500 · EducationYESHIVA HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS INC: $250 · EducationZAMIR CHORAL FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 · Arts & CultureMuseum of Modern Art: $600 · Arts & CultureMETROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART: $600 · Arts & CultureTHE JEWISH MUSEUM: $175 · Arts & CultureDISABILITY BELONGS: $1,000 · Human ServicesNEW JERSEY FEDERATION OF YOUNG MEN'S HEBREW ASSOCIATION AND YOUNG WOMEN'S: $500 · Human ServicesBIKUR CHOLIM OF MIAMI BEACH INC: $360 · Human ServicesAMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC: $500 · InternationalThe American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc: $500 · InternationalCentral Fund of Israel: $280 · InternationalSharsheret Inc: $250 · HealthWest Side Hatzoloh: $180 · Health
Other$50,652Religion$14,100Philanthropy$3,930Education$2,750Arts & Culture$2,375Human Services$1,860International$1,280Health$430

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 budgetOhr Torah Stone Institutions of Israel: $13,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetPEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $3,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA UNIVERSITY: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL JEWISH OUTREACH PROGRAM IN: $1,100 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetZAMIR CHORAL FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDISABILITY BELONGS: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMuseum of Modern Art: $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMETROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART: $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNEW JERSEY FEDERATION OF YOUNG MEN'S HEBREW ASSOCIATION AND YOUNG WOMEN'S: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBIKUR CHOLIM OF MIAMI BEACH INC: $360 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCentral Fund of Israel: $280 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF LOS ANGELES: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSharsheret Inc: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLAMDEINU INC: $180 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE JEWISH MUSEUM: $175 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.

Jewish Communal FundShaykin Family Founda…Aviva & Marvin Sussma…Jewish Community Foun…Vanguard Charitable E…The US Charitable Gif…American Endowment Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…Gs Donor Advised Phil…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…
Jewish Communal FundNY18.6× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Shaykin Family Foundation · Aviva & Marvin Sussman Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Metrowest NJ · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The US Charitable Gift Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving 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 Landowne & Bloom Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Landowne & Bloom Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 4%
  • Sharsheret Inc: 4% of income from government
  • Yeshiva High School for Girls Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
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 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Landowne & Bloom’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