Skip to content

· Private foundation

Lowenstein Brothers Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$301k
Granted FY2021
9
Grants FY2021
3
States reached
$269k
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

56% of Lowenstein Brothers Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Houston Jewish Community Foundation, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 1 organization directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2021, the last year Lowenstein Brothers Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 5 organizations, $301k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

2
’19
2
’20
5
’21
1
’22
2
’23
1
’25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Philanthropy$6.0MHuman Services$50kEducation$15kReligion$1kEmployment$1kHealth$500Other$0
02FY2021 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2021

  • Under $10k7 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
  • $250k+1 grant · $269k
$1,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LOWENSTEIN FAMILY SUPPORTING FOUNDATION$269,000
THE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF GREATER KANSAS CITY$20,000
HYMAN BRAND HEBREW ACADEMY$5,000
Individual grant recipient$3,000
JEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE$1,000
JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER KANSAS CITY$1,000
BETH EL SYNAGOGUE$1,000
CIRCLE OF HOPE NICU FOUNDATION$500
CONGREGATION BETH SHALOM$250
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 57% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%BETH EL SYNAGOGUE: $1k → 11%HOUSTON JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $1.3M → 16%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $30k → 5%KU HILLEL: $3k → 15%JEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE: $1k → 15%JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN: $1.3M → 14%JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF: $739k → 5%Lowenstein Family Supporting Foundation: $300k → 5%Lowenstein Family Supporting Foundation: $270k → 5%LOWENSTEIN FAMILY SUPPORTING FOUNDATION: $269k → 5%LOWENSTEIN FAMILY SUPPORT FDN: $200k → 5%LOWENSTEIN FAMILY SUPPORTING FOUNDATION: $180k → 5%JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER KANSAS COTY: $40k → 5%THE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF GREATER KANSAS CITY: $20k → 5%HYMAN BRAND HEBREW ACADEMY: $5k → 5%Hyman Brand Hebrew Academy: $5k → 5%Hyman Brand Hebrew Academy: $5k → 5%CONGREGATION BETH SHALOM: $250 → 5%JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER KANSAS CITY: $1k → 5%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.

38%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.3M · 3 repeat orgs$2.1M to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2021, 0 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call). Read against FY2021, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
7

Total granted

$1.3M
$2.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+50%
+188%

Still filing today

100%
43%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.1M went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’25
PhilanthropyEducationOther
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

  • LF
    LOWENSTEIN FAMILY SUPPORTING FOUNDATION
    5× · 2019–2023 · $1.2M · revenue +366% · 91% of their budget
  • JC
    JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF GREATER KANSAS CITY
    2× · 2021–2023 · $50k · revenue +50%
  • HB
    HYMAN BRAND HEBREW ACADEMY
    3× · 2019–2021 · $15k · revenue +15%

Funded once

  • JU
    JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO
    one grant, 2025 · $1.3M · revenue 0%
  • JC
    JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF
    one grant, 2025 · $739k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $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
The Jewish Community Foundation Charitable Fund
—
2
University of Judaism Foundation
—
3
The Jewish Foundation of Cincinnati
Philanthropy
4
Jewish Community Center Endowment Fund

The Jewish Community Center Endowment Fund was created to support the programs and operations of the Evelyn Rubenstein Jewish Community Center of Houston.

Religion
5
The Jewish Fund

The jewish fund is organized and operates exclusively for charitable, educational, and religious purposes. the fund's primary activities are: supporting a jewish health care mission in the greater detroit area and michigan; promotion of…

Philanthropy
6
The Jewish Community Foundation

Built around the values of tzedakah (righteousness, charity) and tikkun olam (repairing the world), the foundation works with east bay jewish donors to realize their philanthropic goals and create a rich, supportive, inclusive and strong…

—
7
Jewish Federation of Greater Buffalo Inc

Guided by Jewish values, the federation convenes, inspires, collaborates, leads and enriches the jewish community locally and around the world. The Federation also serves as a fundraising body and coordinates a veriety of services on the…

Philanthropy
8
Jewish Communal Fund

To facilitate and promote philanthropy through donor advised funds.

Philanthropy
9
Jewish Community Foundation of Central New York Inc

To ensure the continuity and vitality of the jewish community

Philanthropy
10
Jewish Life Foundation
—
11
Jewish Federation of Nashville and Middle Tennessee

The jewish federation of nashville is the central voluntary communal organization of the jewish community. through its fund-raising, planning and community relations efforts, either independently or in partnership with other jewish…

Philanthropy
12
Jewish Federation of Greater Kansas City

To sustain and enhance jewish life at home and around the world.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Kansas City; the most unlike its peers is Circle of Hope Nicu Foundation. 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

9 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. 9 of the 13 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
8/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $1,344,560 · PhilanthropyJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGOHouston Jewish Community Foundation: $1,344,560 · PhilanthropyHouston Jewish Community FoundationAMERICAN ENDOWMENT FOUNDATION: $1,344,560 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN ENDOWMENT FOUNDATIONLOWENSTEIN FAMILY SUPPORTING FOUNDATION: $1,219,000 · PhilanthropyLOWENSTEIN FAMILY SUPPORTING FOUNDATION+3 more: $91,500 · PhilanthropyJEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF: $739,301 · OtherJEWISH COMMUN…+4 more: $5,250 · OtherHYMAN BRAND HEBREW ACADEMY: $15,000 · Education
Philanthropy$5,344,180Other$744,551Education$15,000

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 budgetJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $1,344,560 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetLOWENSTEIN FAMILY SUPPORTING FOUNDATION: $1,219,000 over 5y, 91% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF GREATER KANSAS CITY: $50,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER KANSAS CITY: $41,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetHYMAN BRAND HEBREW ACADEMY: $15,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE BUREAU OF KANSAS CITY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCIRCLE OF HOPE NICU FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.9% 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.

Greater Kansas City Community FoundationMO15.2× affinity5 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Greater Kansas City Community Foundation · Stanley J Bushman Supporting Foundation · Goldberg Family Foundation · Nerman Family Foundation · Marion and Henry Bloch Family Foundation · 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 Lowenstein Brothers Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lowenstein Brothers Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–10%
    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 Lowenstein Brothers Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Lowenstein Brothers 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 13 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Lowenstein Brothers’ filings →

    More from the funding graph