Skip to content
Natalie & Jonathan Gerber Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Natalie & Jonathan Gerber Family 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.

$708k
Granted FY2024still arriving
12
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$364k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Religion$1.4MPhilanthropy$199kPublic Safety & Disaster$25kHealth$17kInternational$11kFood & Nutrition$8kEducation$4kHuman Services$3kOther$0
02FY2024 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k6 grants · $19k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $64k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $260k
  • $250k+1 grant · $364k
$11,209
Median grant
3
States reached
$372k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
B'NEI AKIVA OF LOS ANGELES$364,181
JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER LOS AN$160,000
WEST COAST TORAH RETREAT CAMP$100,359
MISC 501C CHARITIES$31,513
Individual grant recipient$21,621
DAVID OVED RETREAT CENTER$11,209
Individual grant recipient$7,650
YOUNG ISRAEL OF CENTURY CITY$6,582
BETH JACOB CONGREGATION$1,891
FOOD ON FOOT$1,176
OUR BIG KITCHEN LOS ANGELES$800
JEWISH NATIONAL FUND$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:

Its human-services grants (FY22–24, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%FOOD ON FOOT: $2k → 14%FOOD ON FOOT: $1k → 14%FOOD ON FOOT: $98 → 14%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
CA
VA
MD
DE
TN
NC
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.
$1.6M · 13 repeat orgs$88k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
25

Total granted

$1.6M
$68k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
+27%

Still filing today

38%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
ReligionHealthInternationalFood & NutritionHuman ServicesEducationOther
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

  • BA
    BNEI AKIVA OF LOS ANGELES
    4× · 2021–2024 · $1.2M · revenue +51%
  • CL
    CHAI LIFELINE INC
    3× · 2021–2023 · $16k · revenue +1%
  • FO
    FOOD ON FOOT
    3× · 2022–2024 · $3k · revenue +8%

Funded once

  • PS
    PICO SHUL-UKRAINIAN RELIEF VOLUNTEE
    one grant, 2022 · $25k
  • AE
    AFRICA EXCHANGE FBO THE MAA TRUST
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
  • KS
    KIRYAT SHEMONA FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +43%
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 Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
2
Sherit Isroel
—
3
Yad Yosef Foundation
Philanthropy
4
Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary

To prepare students for the rabbinate and to issue the traditional certificate of ordination in connection therewith. the seminary is authorized to confer the degree of master of hebrew literature (m.h.l.), doctor of hebrew literature…

Education
5
University of Judaism Foundation
—
6
Bais Yisrael Foundation
—
7
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
8
Youth Towns of Israel (California)
International
9
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
10
Yad Laniyim
Philanthropy
11
Jewish Life Foundation
—
12
Bronfman Youth Fellowships to Israel in Inc
Youth Development
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bureau of Jewish Education of Greater Los Angeles Inc; the most unlike its peers is Yula High School. 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

18 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. 18 of the 42 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
11/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BNEI AKIVA OF LOS ANGELES: $1,169,809 · ReligionBNEI AKIVA OF LOS ANGELES+5 more: $21,750 · ReligionJEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER LOS AN: $160,325 · OtherJEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER LOS…WEST COAST TORAH RETREAT CAMP: $153,964 · OtherWEST COAST TORAH RETREAT CAMPIndividual grant recipient: $49,621 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMISC 501C CHARITIES: $35,808 · OtherMISC 501C CHARITIESPICO SHUL-UKRAINIAN RELIEF VOLUNTEE: $25,483 · OtherBETH JACOB CONGREGATION: $19,837 · Other+19 more: $57,014 · Other+19 moreCHAI LIFELINE INC: $16,291 · Health+2 more: $360 · HealthYAD EZRA V'SHULAMIT: $3,600 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF ERETZ HEMDAH: $2,800 · InternationalJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $750 · InternationalYULA HIGH SCHOOL: $3,700 · EducationFOOD ON FOOT: $3,074 · Human ServicesFOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC: $1,800 · Youth DevelopmentTOUCH OF KINDNESS INC: $1,000 · Food & NutritionOUR BIG KITCHEN LOS ANGELES: $800 · Food & Nutrition
Religion$1,191,559Other$502,052Health$16,651International$7,150Education$3,700Human Services$3,074Youth Development$1,800Food & Nutrition$1,800

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 budgetBNEI AKIVA OF LOS ANGELES: $1,169,809 over 4y, 15% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $16,291 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBUREAU OF JEWISH EDUCATION OF GREATER LOS ANGELES INC: $13,250 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetKIRYAT SHEMONA FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetYULA HIGH SCHOOL: $3,700 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYAD EZRA V'SHULAMIT: $3,600 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFOOD ON FOOT: $3,074 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF ERETZ HEMDAH: $2,800 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetJEWISH FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE TORAH AND NATURE FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC: $1,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEFRAT DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION USA INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTOUCH OF KINDNESS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOUR BIG KITCHEN LOS ANGELES: $800 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $750 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTZEDEK AMERICA: $500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCELIAC DISEASE FOUNDATION: $180 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 BNEI AKIVA OF LOS ANGELES ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗
  • Who funds BUREAU OF JEWISH EDUCATION OF GREATER LOS ANGELES INC ↗
  • Who funds KIRYAT SHEMONA FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds YULA HIGH SCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds YAD EZRA V'SHULAMIT ↗
  • Who funds FOOD ON FOOT ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF ERETZ HEMDAH ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds THE TORAH AND NATURE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC ↗
  • Who funds EFRAT DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION USA INC ↗
  • Who funds TOUCH OF KINDNESS INC ↗
  • Who funds OUR BIG KITCHEN LOS ANGELES ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC ↗
  • Who funds TZEDEK AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
  • Who funds CELIAC DISEASE FOUNDATION ↗

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.

Jewish Community Foun…Lee and Anne Samson C…Jewish Communal FundJewish Federation Cou…Davmarn FoundationJack and Gitta Nagel …The Elishis Family Fo…Ryzman Foundation IncJewish Foundation of …California Community …Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…
Jewish Community Foundation of Los AngelesCA28.9× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Lee and Anne Samson Charitable Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Jewish Federation Council of Greater La · Davmarn Foundation · Jack and Gitta Nagel Foundation · The Elishis Family Foundation · Ryzman Foundation Inc · Jewish Foundation of Memphis · California Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust

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 Natalie & Jonathan Gerber Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Natalie & Jonathan Gerber Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%5%11%20%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
    1get 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 Natalie & Jonathan Gerber Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Natalie & Jonathan Gerber Family 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 42 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 Natalie & Jonathan Gerber 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