Skip to content
Lee and Maxine Peck Foundation at a glance

· 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.

$66k
Granted FY2024still arriving
42
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
States reached
$10k
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 2024.

Religion$143kEducation$128kHealth$64kHuman Services$45kRecreation & Sports$28kPhilanthropy$27kFood & Nutrition$25kYouth Development$21kOther$0
02FY2024 · 42 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$270k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CONGREGATION DOVID BEN NUCHIM$9,600
CONGREGATION B'NAI JACOB$4,000
ST VALENTINE CHURCH$3,500
LUBAVITCH CHEDER$3,000
PRESBYTERIAN VILLAGE OF MICHIGAN$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
YOUNG ISRAEL OAK PARK$1,500
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BARUCH FEIGA$1,500
CROSSROAD FOR YOUTH$1,500
FAR CONSERVATORY$1,500
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF IDC$1,500
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 (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. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%COMMUNITY LIVING CENTERS: $1k → 8%COMMUNITY LIVING CENTERS: $1k → 8%COMMUNITY LIVING CENTERS: $1k → 8%COMMUNITY LIVING CENTERS: $1k → 8%COMMUNITY LIVING CENTERS: $1k → 8%COMMUNITY LIVING CENTERS: $1k → 8%COMMUNITY LIVING CENTERS: $1k → 8%ORCHARD CHILDREN SERVICES: $2k → 8%ORCHARD CHILDREN SERVICES: $2k → 8%ORCHARD CHILDREN SERVICES: $1k → 8%ORCHARD CHILDREN SERVICES: $1k → 8%ORCHARD CHILDREN SERVICES: $1k → 8%ORCHARD CHILDREN SERVICES: $1k → 8%ORCHARD CHILDREN SERVICES: $1k → 8%PRESBYTERIAN VILLAGE OF MICHIGAN: $3k → 8%PRESBYTERIAN VILLAGE OF MICHIGAN: $3k → 8%PRESBYTERIAN VILLAGE OF MICHIGAN: $3k → 8%PRESBYTERIAN VILLAGE OF MICHIGAN: $3k → 8%PRESBYTERIAN VILLAGE OF MICHIGAN: $2k → 8%PRESBYTERIAN VILLAGE OF MICHIGAN: $2k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

ME
IL
MI
NY
MA
OH
PA
NJ
MD
TN
DC
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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$493k · 54 repeat orgs$24k to everyone else

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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

54
14

Total granted

$493k
$21k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%
+44%

Still filing today

39%
7%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k 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
EducationHealthHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsArts & CultureReligionOther
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

  • FC
    FAR CONSERVATORY OF THERAPEUTIC AND PERFORMING ARTS
    7× · 2017–2024 · $22k · revenue +86%
  • OY
    Oholei Yosef Yitzchak Lubavitch
    5× · 2017–2024 · $22k · revenue +126%
  • EA
    Eton Academy
    8× · 2017–2024 · $22k · revenue +5%

Funded once

  • PV
    PRESBYTERIAN VILLAGE OF M
    one grant, 2017 · $4k
  • OA
    OFFERING ALTERNATIVE THERAPY WITH
    one grant, 2018 · $3k
  • CD
    CONGREGATION DAVID BEN NU
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
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 Gedolah Rabbinical College Inc

Provide college level education and extensive background of jewish law and talmudic studies and rabbinical ordination.

Education
2
Tzohar Halev Inc

Support of tzohar-a school for special needs children located in israel

Education
3
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
4
Yeshivas Nachlas Sofrim Inc

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.

Religion
5
Chevrah Lomdei Mishnah Inc

Promoting study of Mishnah and other Jewish texts

Religion
6
Yeshiva Gedola Na'os Yaakov

A post-secondary school offering an educational program in talmudic study

Education
7
Yeshiva Tiferes Boruch

A jewish secondary school which seeks to inculcate its students with high character and religious values to produce future religious leaders

—
8
Ruach Chaim Inc

Educational and charitable

Religion
9
Yeshiva of Central Queens

The school provides instructions and secular and religious education for students grade k through 8th.

Education
10
Cheder Chabad of Monsey

To provide high quality jewish religious and secular education

Education
11
Yeshiva Nishmas Hatorah Inc

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.

Religion
12
Mesivta of Clifton Inc

Establishment & conduct of religious school in the tradition of the Orthodox Jewish faith.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Crossroads for Youth; 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.
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 73 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/25
Grantees still filing
18/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ST VALENTINE CHURCH: $28,500 · OtherST VALENTINE CHURCHCONGREGATION DOVID BEN NUCHIM: $27,600 · OtherCONGREGATION DOVID BEN NUCHIMFAR CONSERVATORY OF THERAPEUTIC AND PERFORMING ARTS: $22,450 · OtherFAR CONSERVATORY OF THERAPEUTIC AND PERFORMING ARTSOATS: $18,090 · OtherYOUNG ISRAEL OAK PARK: $18,000 · OtherCAPUCHIN SOUP KITCHEN: $17,500 · OtherCONGREGATION B'NAI JACOB: $16,500 · OtherFRIENDSHIP CIRCLE: $16,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $16,000 · OtherTZEDAKAH ENHANCEMENT PROJECT: $13,100 · OtherKOLLEL INSTITUTE OF GREATER DETROIT: $13,000 · OtherCONGREGATION OF RIMANOV: $13,000 · Other+46 more: $156,848 · Other+46 moreOholei Yosef Yitzchak Lubavitch: $21,500 · EducationOholei Yos…Eton Academy: $21,500 · EducationEton Acade…CHALDEAN FEDERATION OF AMERICA: $3,500 · EducationCHALDEAN F…+1 more: $250 · EducationPresbyterian Villages of Michigan: $14,750 · Human ServicesORCHARDS CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC: $8,000 · Human ServicesCOMMUNITY LIVING CENTERS INC: $7,000 · Human ServicesKIDS KICKING CANCER INC: $18,500 · HealthCHAI LIFELINE INC: $2,650 · HealthST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $1,000 · HealthCROSSROADS FOR YOUTH: $14,500 · Recreation & SportsSPECIAL OLYMPICS INC: $4,000 · Recreation & SportsDetroit Childrens Choir: $10,500 · Arts & CultureDETROIT OPERA: $3,500 · Arts & CultureAMERICAN FRIENDS OF REICHMAN UNIVERSITY INC: $13,500 · International
Other$377,088Education$46,750Human Services$29,750Health$22,150Recreation & Sports$18,500Arts & Culture$14,000International$13,500

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 budgetFAR CONSERVATORY OF THERAPEUTIC AND PERFORMING ARTS: $22,450 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetOholei Yosef Yitzchak Lubavitch: $21,500 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetEton Academy: $21,500 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetKIDS KICKING CANCER INC: $18,500 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetPresbyterian Villages of Michigan: $14,750 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetCROSSROADS FOR YOUTH: $14,500 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF REICHMAN UNIVERSITY INC: $13,500 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetDetroit Childrens Choir: $10,500 over 5y, 1.2% of budgetORCHARDS CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC: $8,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetTRAVIS MILLS FOUNDATION: $8,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetSAVE A CHILD'S HEART FOUNDATION US INC: $7,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetCOMMUNITY LIVING CENTERS INC: $7,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH RESOURCE CENTER: $7,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CHALDEAN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetYTI ORG: $4,500 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS INC: $4,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetCHALDEAN FEDERATION OF AMERICA: $3,500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetDETROIT OPERA: $3,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetGEMACH CHESSED INC: $2,750 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $2,650 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHATZALAH OF MICHIGAN: $2,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetOhr Olam Corp: $1,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMATAN BSETER: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetYESHIVA OF GREATER WASHINGTON INC: $250 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 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 SAVE A CHILD'S HEART FOUNDATION US INC ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY LIVING CENTERS INC ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH RESOURCE CENTER ↗
  • 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 ↗

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.

United Jewish Foundat…Community Foundation …Ahavas Avraham Founda…Jewish Communal FundEdward and Norma Jean…The Meer Family Found…Jewish Federation of …The Ojc FundBorsand Family Founda…The Jmg FoundationGs Donor Advised Phil…The Kresge Foundation
United Jewish FoundationMI29.8× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 Lee and Maxine Peck Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lee and Maxine Peck Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Yeshiva of Greater Washington Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
5report 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 73 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 Lee and Maxine Peck’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