· Private foundation
Schockett Family Foundation Inc
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CONG KOLLEL KOL AARON | $1,800 |
| CONG ZICHRON RABBEINU MOSHE FEINSTEIN | $1,225 |
| MESIVTA YESHIVA RABBI CHAIM BERLIN | $360 |
| MESAMCHE LEV | $329 |
| ZAKA TEL AVIV | $300 |
| YAD L'ACHIM USA INC | $180 |
| YESHIVA OHR SIMCHA OF ENGLEWOOD | $180 |
| SHILOH ISRAEL CHILDREN'S FUND | $125 |
| Individual grant recipient | $120 |
| LEV L'ACHIM | $75 |
| KEREN ANIYIM | $72 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
26 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- SISHILOH ISRAEL CHILDREN'S FUND INC9× · 2017–2025 · $735 · revenue +70%
- MCMISASKIM CORP9× · 2017–2025 · $575 · revenue +34%
- FOFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC2× · 2017–2018 · $150 · revenue +383%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2018 · $3k
- MUMIKVAH USA INCgraduated7× · 2019–2025 · $2k · revenue +121%
- YDYESHIVA DARCHEI ALIYAone grant, 2017 · $500 · revenue -99%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
The organization provides financial assistance to victims of acts of terrorism in the state of israel.
To promote, benefit, and support Jewish religious, charitable & educational activities in Israel and the USA.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Agudath Israel of America and the most unlike its peers is Hebron Fund Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 27 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
19 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 19 of the 50 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds MIKVAH USA INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF KOLLEL MISHNAS ELIEZER ↗
- Who funds SHILOH ISRAEL CHILDREN'S FUND INC ↗
- Who funds KEREN ANIYIM INC ↗
- Who funds MISASKIM CORP ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA DARCHEI ALIYA ↗
- Who funds GOVOAH SPECIAL PROJECTS INC ↗
- Who funds Zaka Tel-Aviv Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YAD ELIEZER ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC ↗
- Who funds KIDS OF COURAGE INC ↗
- Who funds HEBRON FUND INC ↗
- Who funds American Friends of Migdal OHR ↗
- Who funds DISKIN ORPHAN HOME OF ISRAEL INC ↗
- Who funds EZER MIZION ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · The Jimmy and Berta Khezrie Charitable Foundation · Alyad Foundation Inc · The Ojc Fund · The Jacob Moses Foundation Inc · The Reich Family Charitable Trust · Allen I Gross Charitable Foundation · The J W Foundation · The Basch Family Foundation · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · The Jmg Foundation · The Setton Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Schockett Family Foundation Inc funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.