Skip to content
Shapiro Family Philanthropic Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Shapiro Family Philanthropic Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$50k
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$11k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Education$95kArts & Culture$70kReligion$35kHealth$19kHuman Services$18kHousing & Shelter$14kAnimals$2kFood & Nutrition$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k15 grants · $30k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $21k
$1,500
Median grant
6
States reached
$480k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$10,500
PHOENIX SYMPHONY$10,000
GESHER DISABILITY RESOURCES$7,200
JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO$5,000
ARIZONA OPERA$5,000
VALLEY OF THE SUN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER$3,000
INTERCAMBIO UNITING COMMUNITIES$2,000
BOULDER COMMUNITY HEALTH FOUNDATION$1,500
ANACORTES FAMILY CENTER$1,500
ALL ROADS AKA BOULDER SHELTER$1,400
BALLET ARIZONA$1,000
FRIENDS OF ADOPTIONS (ANIMAL ARK)$500
PLANNED PARENTHOOD MADISON$350
PORCHLIGHT FOUNDATION$350
ACLU FOUNDATION-WISCONSIN$300
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, $32k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 98% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%DOMESTIC ABUSE INTERVENTION: $750 → 10%HUTS FOR VETS: $300 → 6%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO: $5k → 12%HUTS FOR VETS: $300 → 6%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO: $3k → 12%BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CNTR: $5k → 12%CENTER FOR IMMIGRANTS: $750 → 12%BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CNTR: $5k → 12%BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CNTR: $2k → 12%BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CNTR: $2k → 12%BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CNTR: $2k → 12%INTERCAMBIO UNITING COMMUNITIES: $2k → 12%INTERCAMBIO UNITING COMMUNITIES: $2k → 12%INTERCAMBIO UNITING COMMUNITIES: $1k → 12%INTERCAMBIO UNITING COMMUNITIES: $1k → 12%INTERCAMBIO UNITING COMMUNITIES: $1k → 12%INTERCAMBIO UNITING COMMUNITIES: $1k → 12%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

WA
MN
WI
MA
NJ
CA
CO
AZ
DC
TX
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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$307k · 21 repeat orgs$21k to everyone else

21 repeat relationships: 14 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
17

Total granted

$307k
$17k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+2%
+17%

Still filing today

67%
47%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
Human ServicesArts & CultureHealthHousing & ShelterAnimalsFood & NutritionOther
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

  • PS
    PHOENIX SYMPHONY ASSOCIATION
    5× · 2020–2025 · $36k · revenue +45%
  • AT
    Arizona Theatre Company
    2× · 2020–2021 · $17k · revenue +38%
  • TB
    THE BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER
    5× · 2020–2024 · $15k · revenue +64%

Funded once

  • AF
    ARCS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2023 · $5k
  • MU
    MCGILL UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2020 · $2k
  • TS
    The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Inc
    one grant, 2023 · $1k · revenue -4%
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
International School of Arizona

Our mission is to provide a progressive international education and advanced multilingual academics in a safe, diverse, and nurturing environment. our innovative and individualized approach to learning prepares highly motivated students…

Education
2
Arizona Community Foundation

To lead, serve and collaborate to mobilize enduring philanthropy for a better arizona.

Philanthropy
3
Jewish Family & Children's Service of Southern Arizona Inc

Jewish family & children's services of southern arizona helps all people meet their full potential by providing expert community and behavioral health services.

Human Services
4
Arizona Family Health Partnership

To make sexual and reproductive healthcare accessible to everyone

—
5
Banner -University Medical Group

Assist banner health complete its mission to make health care easier so life can be better by providing integrated & coordinated care & population health management.

Health
6
Vitalyst Health Foundation

To connect, support and inform efforts to improve the health of individuals and communities in arizona.

Health
7
Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce

Greater phoenix chamber of commerce (the chamber) catalyzes regional prosperity with forward-thinking public policy, intentional economic growth, and diverse, prepared talent.

—
8
Colorado Legal Services

To provide meaningful access to high quality, civil legal services in the pursuit of justice for as many low income persons and members of vulnerable populations throughout colorado as possible.

Crime & Legal
9
100 Club of Arizona

To provide immediate financial assistance to families of public safety officers and firefighters who are seriously injured or killed in the line of duty, and to provide resources to enhance their safety and welfare.

—
10
Valle Del Sol Inc

Valle del sol inspires positive change by investing in health and human services to strengthen families with tools and skills for self-sufficiency and by building the next generation of latino and diverse leaders.

Health
11
Nishmat Adin

Nishmat adin lays the foundation for students to become lifelong learners and scholars steeped in their jewish roots and identities, confident in their talents, adept at navigating the world around them, emboldened to turn challenge into…

Education
12
Loft Cinema Inc Fka Tucson Cinema Foundation Inc

Building community by celebrating the art and diversity of film.

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Phoenix Symphony Association; the most unlike its peers is International Jazz Day Az. 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

24 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. 24 of the 41 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)
24/24
Grantees still filing
13/24
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

U OF MN FOUNDATION: $75,000 · OtherU OF MN FOUNDATIONIndividual grant recipient: $65,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCONGREGATION BETH ISRAEL OF PHOENIX ARIZONA: $15,177 · OtherCONGREGATION BETH ISRAEL OF PHOENIX ARIZONAGESHER DISABILITY RESOURCES INC: $10,700 · OtherGESHER DISABILITY RESOURCES INC+19 more: $21,536 · Other+19 morePHOENIX SYMPHONY ASSOCIATION: $36,044 · Arts & CulturePHOENIX SYMPHONY ASSOCIA…Arizona Theatre Company: $17,112 · Arts & CultureArizona Theatre CompanyARIZONA OPERA COMPANY: $15,726 · Arts & CultureARIZONA OPERA COMPANY+2 more: $1,400 · Arts & CultureTHE BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $14,800 · Human ServicesTHE BOULDE…JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO INC: $7,500 · Human ServicesJEWISH FAM…INTERCAMBIO DE COMUNIDADES: $7,500 · Human ServicesINTERCAMBI…+3 more: $2,100 · Human Services+3 moreTucson International School Inc: $18,648 · EducationANACORTES FAMILY CENTER: $11,000 · Housing & ShelterTHE PORCHLIGHT FOUNDATION INC: $1,450 · Housing & ShelterBOULDER COMMUNITY HEALTH FOUNDATION: $4,000 · HealthThe Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Inc: $1,250 · HealthNURSE-FAMILY PARTNERSHIP: $1,000 · HealthSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $1,500 · Food & Nutrition
Other$187,913Arts & Culture$70,282Human Services$31,900Education$18,648Housing & Shelter$12,450Health$6,250Food & Nutrition$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 budgetPHOENIX SYMPHONY ASSOCIATION: $36,044 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTucson International School Inc: $18,648 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetArizona Theatre Company: $17,112 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetARIZONA OPERA COMPANY: $15,726 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $14,800 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetANACORTES FAMILY CENTER: $11,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetGESHER DISABILITY RESOURCES INC: $10,700 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF COLORADO INC: $7,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetINTERCAMBIO DE COMUNIDADES: $7,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetBOULDER COMMUNITY HEALTH FOUNDATION: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE PORCHLIGHT FOUNDATION INC: $1,450 over 3y, 3.2% of budgetThe Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Inc: $1,250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBALLET ARIZONA: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNURSE-FAMILY PARTNERSHIP: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHEARTLAND FARM SANCTUARY INC: $750 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDOMESTIC ABUSE INTERVENTION SERVICES INC: $750 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCenter For Immigrants and Immigration Se: $750 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLONGMONT HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHuts for Vets: $600 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetONE FAMILY FUND: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetInternational Jazz Day AZ: $400 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORKERS: $236 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.

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.

Arizona Community Fou…Jewish Community Foun…Baird Foundation IncFriedel Family Founda…The Herberger Foundat…Margaret T Morris Fou…Virginia G Piper Char…Community Foundation …Rose Community Founda…Colorado Gives Founda…American Express Foun…Gs Donor Advised Phil…
Arizona Community FoundationAZ17.8× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Arizona Community Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Phoenix · Baird Foundation Inc · Friedel Family Foundation · The Herberger Foundation · Margaret T Morris Foundation · Virginia G Piper Charitable Trust · Community Foundation Boulder County · Rose Community Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · American Express Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc

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 Shapiro Family Philanthropic Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Shapiro Family Philanthropic Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 41 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 Shapiro Family Philanthropic’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