Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Skolnik 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.

$210k
Granted FY2024still arriving
14
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$71k
Largest
01What you fund
0179% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20192024.

Human Services$358kReligion$337kEducation$102kArts & Culture$10kRecreation & Sports$5kPhilanthropy$2kYouth Development$1kOther$0
02FY2024 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k8 grants · $21k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $119k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $71k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$51k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Chicago Chesed Fund$70,530
Cheder Lubavitch Hebrew Day School$40,000
The Shluchim Office$38,000
Chabad of Rancho Mirage$20,800
Joan Dachs Bais Yaakov Elementary Hebrew School$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
Chabad of Southwest Miami$5,000
Yeshivas Kesser Yonah$5,000
Khal Chasidim$5,000
Mebachem Education Foundation$3,600
Zichron Shmual Inc$1,000
Mosdot Botoshan Inc$600
Individual grant recipient$360
Yeshivas Minchas$250
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY19–24, $358k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Chicago Chesed Fund: $71k → 14%Chicago Chesed Fund: $66k → 14%Chicago Chesed Fund: $62k → 14%Chicago Chesed Fund: $57k → 14%Chicago Chesed Fund: $53k → 14%Chicago Chesed Fund: $49k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

Which US states your grants reach

IL
WI
NY
MA
NV
NJ
CA
AZ
SC

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$822k · 21 repeat orgs$104k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +200% since the first grant, against +49% for the ones you funded once.

21 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
16

Total granted

$822k
$92k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+200%
+49%

Still filing today

14%
19%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $11k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationHuman ServicesFood & NutritionReligionRecreation & SportsOther

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

  • CC
    CHICAGO CHESED FUND
    6× · 2019–2024 · $358k · revenue +83%
  • ME
    MENACHEM EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC
    6× · 2019–2024 · $15k · revenue +200%
  • YK
    YESHIVAS KESSER YONAH
    4× · 2020–2024 · $12k · revenue +348%

Funded once

  • YB
    YACHAD BEAHSIYA INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $30k · revenue +49% · 39% of their budget
  • TL
    The Living Room
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $10k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
04the grantee network

7 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 7 of the 42 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
7/7
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

The Shluchim Office — $127,600 · OtherThe Shluchim OfficeChabad of Rancho Mirage — $52,800 · OtherChabad of Rancho MirageCHEDER LUBAVITCH HEBREW DAY SCHOOL INC — $50,000 · OtherCHEDER LUBAVITCH HEBREW DAY SCHOOL INCNORTH SUBURBAN LUBAVITCH CHABAD — $32,500 · OtherNORTH SUBURBAN LUBAVITCH CHABADIndividual grant recipient — $30,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCHABAD OF GREATER GREENVILLE — $20,000 · OtherJoan Dachs Bais Yaakov Elementary Hebrew School — $20,000 · Other+28 more — $172,980 · Other+28 moreCHICAGO CHESED FUND — $357,636 · Human ServicesCHICAGO CHESED FUNDYACHAD BEAHSIYA INC — $30,000 · ReligionMENACHEM EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC — $14,600 · EducationYESHIVAS KESSER YONAH — $12,000 · EducationCAMP NAGEELA MIDWEST INC — $5,000 · Recreation & SportsJEWISH FEDERATION OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO — $1,800 · PhilanthropyFriends of Emek Lone Soldiers Inc — $500 · Food & Nutrition
Other$505,880Human Services$357,636Religion$30,000Education$26,600Recreation & Sports$5,000Philanthropy$1,800Food & Nutrition$500

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetCHICAGO CHESED FUND — $357,636 over 6y, 1.0% of budgetYACHAD BEAHSIYA INC — $30,000 over 1y, 39% of budgetMENACHEM EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC — $14,600 over 6y, 0.7% of budgetYESHIVAS KESSER YONAH — $12,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCAMP NAGEELA MIDWEST INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO — $1,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFriends of Emek Lone Soldiers Inc — $500 over 1y, 0.8% of budget
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 CHICAGO CHESED FUND
  • Who funds YACHAD BEAHSIYA INC
  • Who funds MENACHEM EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds YESHIVAS KESSER YONAH
  • Who funds CAMP NAGEELA MIDWEST INC
  • Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO
  • Who funds Friends of Emek Lone Soldiers Inc

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.

Bitton Family Foundation IncIL13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Bitton Family Foundation Inc · Aj & Sl Stern Family Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile 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 Skolnik Family Foundation 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.

2023
202122232425
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%your 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
    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 · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Skolnik Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Skolnik 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 42 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph