· Private foundation
Lee and Maxine Peck 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CONGREGATION DOVID BEN NUCHIM | $9,600 |
| CONGREGATION B'NAI JACOB | $4,000 |
| ST VALENTINE CHURCH | $3,500 |
| PRESBYTERIAN VILLAGE OF MICHIGAN | $3,000 |
| LUBAVITCH CHEDER | $3,000 |
| TZEDAKAH ENHANCEMENT PROJECT | $2,600 |
| ETON ACADEMY | $2,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,030 |
| FRIENDSHIP CIRCLE | $2,000 |
| KIDS KICKING CANCER | $2,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,500 |
| CAPUCHIN SOUP KITCHEN | $1,500 |
| FAR CONSERVATORY | $1,500 |
| CROSSROAD FOR YOUTH | $1,500 |
| YOUNG ISRAEL OAK PARK | $1,500 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $30k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
54 repeat relationships — 37 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- FCFAR CONSERVATORY OF THERAPEUTIC AND PERFORMING ARTS7× · 2017–2024 · $22k · revenue +86%
- OYOholei Yosef Yitzchak Lubavitch5× · 2017–2024 · $22k · revenue +126%
- EAEton Academy8× · 2017–2024 · $22k · revenue +5%
Funded once
- PVPRESBYTERIAN VILLAGE OF Mone grant, 2017 · $4k
- OAOFFERING ALTERNATIVE THERAPY WITHone grant, 2018 · $3k
- CDCONGREGATION DAVID BEN NUone grant, 2017 · $3k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Provide college level education and extensive background of jewish law and talmudic studies and rabbinical ordination.
Support of tzohar-a school for special needs children located in israel
Religious School
To cultivate students' intellectual, moral and creative capacities to the fullest by transmitting the necessary skills and methods that enable students to master all areas of torah scholarship.
Promoting study of Mishnah and other Jewish texts
A post-secondary school offering an educational program in talmudic study
A jewish secondary school which seeks to inculcate its students with high character and religious values to produce future religious leaders
Educational and charitable
The school provides instructions and secular and religious education for students grade k through 8th.
To provide high quality jewish religious and secular education
An institution for higher learning and study of talmudic law for post high school students, and students returning from their studies in israel, where they can further their education.
Establishment & conduct of religious school in the tradition of the Orthodox Jewish faith.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Crossroads for Youth and the most unlike its peers is Ohr Olam Corp. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 29 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
25 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 25 of the 73 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds FAR CONSERVATORY OF THERAPEUTIC AND PERFORMING ARTS ↗
- Who funds Oholei Yosef Yitzchak Lubavitch ↗
- Who funds Eton Academy ↗
- Who funds KIDS KICKING CANCER INC ↗
- Who funds Presbyterian Villages of Michigan ↗
- Who funds CROSSROADS FOR YOUTH ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF REICHMAN UNIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds Detroit Childrens Choir ↗
- Who funds ORCHARDS CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds TRAVIS MILLS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY LIVING CENTERS INC ↗
- Who funds JEWISH RESOURCE CENTER ↗
- Who funds SAVE A CHILD'S HEART FOUNDATION US INC ↗
- Who funds THE CHALDEAN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds YTI ORG ↗
- Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS INC ↗
- Who funds CHALDEAN FEDERATION OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds DETROIT OPERA ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: United Jewish Foundation · Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · Ahavas Avraham Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Edward and Norma Jean Meer Charitable Foundation · The Meer Family Foundation · Jewish Federation of Detroit · The Ojc Fund · Borsand Family Foundation Inc · The Jmg Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Kresge Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Lee and Maxine Peck Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Yeshiva of Greater Washington Inc — 1% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.