Skip to content

· Private foundation

M-K Link Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$305k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$305k
Largest
01What it funds
0178% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Philanthropy$2.7MReligion$468kArts & Culture$133kCivil Rights$67kHuman Services$56kHealth$33kEducation$28kYouth Development$15kOther$0
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$305,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$735k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MK LINK CHARITABLE FUND$305,000
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, $41k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%CHAI-4-EVER: $18k → 11%CHAI-4-EVER: $15k → 11%CHAI-4-EVER: $8k → 11%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

IL
NY
MA
NV
NJ
CA
UT
CO
AZ
MS
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.

78%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.1M · 18 repeat orgs$856k to everyone else

18 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 17 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
20

Total granted

$3.1M
$856k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+103%
+243%

Still filing today

22%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Civil RightsArts & CultureHuman ServicesSocial ScienceEducationHealthOther
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

  • TF
    THE FILMMAKERS COLLABORATIVE INC
    2× · 2017–2019 · $124k · revenue +96%
  • AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE
    3× · 2017–2019 · $42k · revenue +116%
  • C4
    CHAI 4EVER INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $41k · revenue +103%

Funded once

  • MH
    MH HABERKORN DONOR ACCOUNT
    one grant, 2021 · $382k
  • JC
    JARIZA CHARITABLE FUND
    one grant, 2021 · $300k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $25k
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 Agency for Israel

The jewish agency binds jews across ideologies and civilizations together in a worldwide jewish family with israel at its center. it provides the global framework for aliyah, ensures global jewish safety, strengthens jewish identity and…

—
2
The Israel Institute Inc

The israel institute, inc. (the institute) enhances knowledge about modern israel by ensuring that more students have access to courses about israel during their time on campus.

International
3
United States Naval Institute

Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.

—
4
Jewish Voice Ministries Intl

To proclaim the gospel, grow the messianic jewish community and engage the church concerning israel and the jewish people. this is done through education, evangelism and being a movement leader, all with excellence in order to transform…

—
5
New Jewish Narrative Inc

To support a strong and secure israel and to carry out public information activities on the middle east peace issues in the united states.

International
6
American Israel Public Affairs Committee

To strengthen and expand the u.s.-israel relationship in ways that enhance the security of the united states and israel.

International
7
National Council of Jewish Women Incorporated

The national council of jewish women is a grassroots nonpartisan organization of volunteers and advocates who strive for social justice by improving the quality of life for women, children and families.

Community Improvement
8
American Society for Technion Israel Institute of Technology Inc

The american technion society supports the technion's critical research and (continued on sch o)

International
9
Jewish Federation Council of Greater La

Based on jewish values, the jewish federation of greater los angeles convenes and leads the community and leverages its resources to assure the continuity of the jewish people, support a secure state of israel, care for jews in need here…

Philanthropy
10
Prizmah Center for Jewish Day Schools Inc

Prizmah: center for jewish day schools is the network for jewish day schools and yeshivas in north america. in partnership with schools, funders, and communities, we invest in talent, advance the financial vitality of schools, and enhance…

Education
11
American Academy of Neurology

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

Community Improvement
12
Clal-the National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership Inc

A leading advocate for pluralism and diversity, clal offers jewish wisdom that enhances public life, deepens civic engagement and cultivates personal growth.

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Aspen Institute Inc; the most unlike its peers is Chai 4EVER 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

8 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. 8 of the 38 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MK LINK CHARITABLE FUND: $950,000 · OtherMK LINK CHARITABLE FUNDBLITZ CHARITABLE FUND: $600,000 · OtherBLITZ CHARITABLE FUNDJAMIKI CHARITABLE FUND: $482,345 · OtherJAMIKI CHARITABLE FUNDMH HABERKORN DONOR ACCOUNT: $382,345 · OtherMH HABERKORN DONOR ACCOUNTTEMPLE BETH ISRAEL OF PHOENIX: $310,000 · OtherTEMPLE BETH ISRAEL OF PHOENIXJARIZA CHARITABLE FUND: $300,000 · OtherJARIZA CHARITABLE FUNDIndividual grant recipient: $232,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+23 more: $417,700 · Other+23 moreTHE FILMMAKERS COLLABORATIVE INC: $124,000 · Arts & CultureAMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE: $42,000 · Civil RightsANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $25,000 · Civil RightsCHAI 4EVER INC: $41,000 · Human ServicesPAT TILLMAN FOUNDATION: $25,000 · PhilanthropyNEUROFIBROMATOSIS NETWORK: $20,000 · HealthTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $10,000 · Social ScienceYESHIVA DAY SCHOOL OF LAS VEGAS: $1,500 · Education
Other$3,674,390Arts & Culture$124,000Civil Rights$67,000Human Services$41,000Philanthropy$25,000Health$20,000Social Science$10,000Education$1,500

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 budgetTHE FILMMAKERS COLLABORATIVE INC: $124,000 over 2y, 3.1% of budgetAMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE: $42,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI 4EVER INC: $41,000 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $25,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPAT TILLMAN FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetNEUROFIBROMATOSIS NETWORK: $20,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA DAY SCHOOL OF LAS VEGAS: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% 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 THE FILMMAKERS COLLABORATIVE INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE ↗
  • Who funds CHAI 4EVER INC ↗
  • Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
  • Who funds PAT TILLMAN FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds NEUROFIBROMATOSIS NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA DAY SCHOOL OF LAS VEGAS ↗

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.

Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO6.2× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 M-K Link Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from M-K Link Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Chai 4EVER Inc: 2% of income from government
  • The Filmmakers Collaborative Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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 38 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on M-K Link’s filings →

More from the funding graph