Skip to content
Marjory & Donald Epstein Family Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Marjory & Donald Epstein Family Charitable 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.

$60k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
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, FY2020 to 2025.

Health$69kHuman Services$61kPhilanthropy$45kEmployment$41kFood & Nutrition$41kReligion$34kHousing & Shelter$25kInternational$20kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $50k
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GESHER HUMAN SERVICES$10,000
JEWISH HOSPICE & CHAPLAINCY NETWORK$10,000
JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES$10,000
HEBREW FREE LOAN$10,000
FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES$10,000
LIGHTHOUSE$5,000
HEINZ C PRECHTER BIPOLAR RESEARCH PROGRAM - MICHIGAN MEDICINE$5,000
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 (FY20–25, $56k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 6%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 6%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $10k → 8%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $10k → 8%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $10k → 8%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $10k → 8%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $10k → 8%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $6k → 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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$327k · 11 repeat orgs$20k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +62% since the first grant, against -28% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
3

Total granted

$327k
$20k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+62%
-28%

Still filing today

64%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
ReligionHuman ServicesPhilanthropyEmploymentArts & CultureInternationalOther
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

  • JF
    JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE
    6× · 2020–2025 · $56k · revenue +120%
  • JH
    JEWISH HOSPICE & CHAPLAINCY NETWORK
    6× · 2020–2025 · $50k · revenue +68%
  • GH
    GESHER HUMAN SERVICES
    5× · 2020–2025 · $41k · revenue +62%

Funded once

  • TB
    TEMPLE BETH EL
    one grant, 2021 · $10k
  • HM
    HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL CENTER INC
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue -28%
  • BB
    BUILDING BEDS 4 KIDS
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
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
Eastern European Jewish Heritage Foundation
Philanthropy
2
Jewish Life Foundation
—
3
University of Judaism Foundation
—
4
National Council of Jewish Women Inc Jersey Hills Section
—
5
Jewish Federation of Greater Clifton-Passaic
—
6
Sherit Isroel
—
7
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
8
The Steinhardt Foundation for Jewish Life Inc
Religion
9
Aish Hatorah Detroit

To ignite jewish passion and empower every jew to embrace their heritage, thereby ensuring the vibrant continuity of the jewish epople.

Religion
10
Foundation for Cincinnati Jewish Seniors formerly Jewish Home of Cincinnati Inc
Health
11
Jewish Historical Society of Michigan

Jewish historical society of michigan shares and celebrates the experiences and contributions of the jewish people, communities and institutions of michigan.

—
12
American Friends of Jewish Hospitals and Education Centers of Brazil Inc
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Family Service; the most unlike its peers is Friends of the Israel Defense Forces. 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 14 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

YAD EZRA: $41,000 · OtherYAD EZRALIGHTHOUSE: $25,000 · OtherLIGHTHOUSEHEINZ C PRECHTER BIPOLAR RESEARCH PROGRAM - MICHIGAN MEDICINE: $19,000 · OtherHEINZ C PRECHTER BIPOLAR RESEARCH PROG…ADAT SHALOM: $12,504 · OtherADAT SHALOMTEMPLE BETH EL: $10,000 · OtherTEMPLE BETH ELTHE JEWISH ENSEMBLE THEATRE: $6,218 · OtherBUILDING BEDS 4 KIDS: $5,000 · OtherJEWISH HOSPICE & CHAPLAINCY NETWORK: $50,000 · ReligionJEWISH HOSPICE & CH…JEWISH VALUES INSTITUTE: $11,000 · ReligionJEWISH VALUES INSTI…JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $56,000 · Human ServicesJEWISH FAMILY SERV…HEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION: $45,000 · PhilanthropyHEBREW FREE LO…GESHER HUMAN SERVICES: $41,000 · EmploymentGESHER HUMAN …FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $20,000 · InternationalHOLOCAUST MEMORIAL CENTER INC: $5,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$118,722Religion$61,000Human Services$56,000Philanthropy$45,000Employment$41,000International$20,000Arts & Culture$5,000

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 FAMILY SERVICE: $56,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH HOSPICE & CHAPLAINCY NETWORK: $50,000 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetHEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION: $45,000 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetGESHER HUMAN SERVICES: $41,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetYAD EZRA: $41,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH VALUES INSTITUTE: $11,000 over 2y, 3.7% of budgetTHE JEWISH ENSEMBLE THEATRE: $6,218 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetHOLOCAUST MEMORIAL CENTER INC: $5,000 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 JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH HOSPICE & CHAPLAINCY NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds HEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds GESHER HUMAN SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds YAD EZRA ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH VALUES INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds THE JEWISH ENSEMBLE THEATRE ↗
  • Who funds HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL CENTER INC ↗

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.

Ben N Teitel Charitab…The Eugene Applebaum …Marjorie and Maxwell …Edward C and Linda Dr…The Sylvia Pevin and …Cathy and James Deutc…The Stone Foundation …Manat FoundationThe Irving and Ethel …George M and Jo Elyn …Borsand Family Founda…Rogers Family Foundat…
Ben N Teitel Charitable TrustMI15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ben N Teitel Charitable Trust · The Eugene Applebaum Family Foundation · Marjorie and Maxwell Jospey Foundation · Edward C and Linda Dresner Levy Foundation · The Sylvia Pevin and George Pevin Foundation · Cathy and James Deutchman Family Foundation · The Stone Foundation of Michigan · Manat Foundation · The Irving and Ethel Palman Foundation · George M and Jo Elyn Nyman Charitable Trust · Borsand Family Foundation Inc · Rogers Family Foundation Corporation

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 Marjory & Donald Epstein Family Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Marjory & Donald Epstein Family Charitable 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%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s 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 · 0–25%
    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 14 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 Marjory & Donald Epstein Family’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