Skip to content
N&C Schwimmer Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

N&C Schwimmer 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.

$46k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$13k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0176% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Religion$90kEnvironment$15kHuman Services$250Other$0
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k7 grants · $33k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $13k
$5,600
Median grant
1
States reached
$186k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VARIOUS CONTRIBUTIONS UNDER 1500$13,063
YESHIVA TIFERET SHMUEL D'ALEKSANDER$7,700
SHAAR EPHRAIM$5,600
ATERES ROSH KOLBESOV$5,600
Individual grant recipient$4,600
TOV V'CHESED$3,600
UNITED TALMUDICAL ACADEMY$3,000
MOSDOS CHERNOBEL$2,750
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Eizer Lilmod Ilelamed: $1k → 13%VARIOUS CONTRIBUTIONS UNDER 1500: $15k → 14%Khal Bnei Mada Inc: $3k → 20%VARIOUS CONTRIBUTIONS UNDER 1500: $13k → 14%Talmud Torah DNitra: $2k → 20%Kollel Zichron Menachem: $7k → 14%Talmud Torah D'Nitra: $2k → 20%SHAAR EPHRAIM: $6k → 14%Talmud Torah D'Nitra: $1k → 20%Yeshiva and Mesivta Meor Yitzchok: $5k → 14%Kahal Shaarei Tefillah: $5k → 14%NISHMAS CHAIM: $5k → 14%SHAAR EPHRAIM: $4k → 14%Shaar Efriam: $4k → 14%Congregation OBR: $4k → 14%Viznitz: $4k → 20%YESHIAS MOSHE VIZNITZ: $3k → 14%Mikva CYL: $2k → 20%Yeshiva and Mesivta Meor Yitzchok: $3k → 14%Elef Hamugein Inc: $1k → 20%Congregation Nishmas Chaim: $3k → 14%Elef Hamugen: $1k → 20%Cong Nihmas Chaim: $3k → 14%Shaar Ephraim: $2k → 14%SHAAREI TEFILLAH: $2k → 14%Charity less than 1500: $4k → 20%Kollel Ahavas Yerusholaim: $1k → 14%Bais Hamedrish Tehila L'Duvid: $1k → 14%Teferes Bnos: $1k → 20%Yeshiva Tiferes Moshe Cong Kol Juda: $800 → 14%ATERES ROSH KOLBESOV: $6k → 14%ATERES ROSH KOLBESOV: $6k → 14%TOV V'CHESED: $4k → 14%UNITED TALMUDICAL ACADEMY: $3k → 14%YESHIVA TIFERET SHMUEL D'ALEKSANDER: $8k → 20%Eitz Chaim Bobov: $6k → 20%Mosdos Chernobel: $2k → 20%Cong Gemach Avrum Shimon: $5k → 20%Cong Khal Yesode Hatorah: $2k → 20%Mosdos Chernobel: $5k → 20%Cong Khal Yesode Hatorah: $1k → 20%MOSDOS CHERNOBEL: $4k → 20%Cong Ohel Torah: $1k → 20%MOSDOS CHERNOBEL: $3k → 20%Cong Khal Yesode Hatorah: $800 → 20%BINYAN YERUSHLAIM: $2k → 20%Mosdos Chernobel: $2k → 20%Congregation Toldos Tzvi: $1k → 20%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.

50%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$85k · 9 repeat orgs$85k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
35

Total granted

$85k
$66k

Still filing today

0%
3%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 59% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $19k went to new ones.

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

  • VC
    VARIOUS CONTRIBUTIONS UNDER 1500
    2× · 2023–2024 · $29k
  • MC
    MOSDOS CHERNOBEL INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $15k
  • AR
    ATERES ROSH KOLBESOV
    2× · 2023–2024 · $12k

Funded once

  • KZ
    Kollel Zichron Menachem
    one grant, 2020 · $7k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $6k
  • KS
    KAHAL SHAAREI TEFILLAH
    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
04the grantee network

1 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2024.

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 2024, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 1 of the 48 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
1/1
Grantees still filing
1/1
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VARIOUS CONTRIBUTIONS UNDER 1500: $28,542 · OtherVARIOUS CONTRIBUTIONS UNDER 1500MOSDOS CHERNOBEL INC: $14,850 · OtherMOSDOS CHERNOBEL INCATERES ROSH KOLBESOV: $11,500 · OtherATERES ROSH KOLBESOVSHAAR EPHRAIM: $11,460 · OtherSHAAR EPHRAIMYESHIVA TIFERET SHMUEL D'ALEKSANDER: $7,700 · OtherYeshiva and Mesivta Meor Yitzchok: $7,600 · OtherKollel Zichron Menachem: $7,200 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $6,300 · Other+39 more: $73,881 · Other+39 moreEZRAS TALMUD CHOCHEM INC: $250 · Youth Development
Other$169,033Youth Development$250

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetEZRAS TALMUD CHOCHEM INC: $250 over 1y, 0.3% 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 EZRAS TALMUD CHOCHEM 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.

The Ojc FundAmerican Friends of B…Kanfei Yoneh Foundati…Hirschfeld & Associat…Zelig and Rifky Weiss…Cnfh FoundationLighting FoundationKerem Family Foundati…Achva FoundationA&E Hauer Family Foun…Bochner FoundationR' Shaya Ben Moshe Fo…
The Ojc FundNY31.4× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · American Friends of Bnai Levy Foundation · Kanfei Yoneh Foundation · Hirschfeld & Associates Foundation · Zelig and Rifky Weiss Family Foundation Inc · Cnfh Foundation · Lighting Foundation · Kerem Family Foundation · Achva Foundation · A&E Hauer Family Foundation · Bochner Foundation · R' Shaya Ben Moshe 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 N&C Schwimmer Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from N&C Schwimmer Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 48 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 N&C Schwimmer’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