Skip to content
Sokolof Grandchildren Charitable Foundat at a glance

· Private foundation

Sokolof Grandchildren Charitable Foundat

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.

$540k
Granted FY2023
17
Grants FY2023
4
States reached
$185k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

58% of Sokolof Grandchildren Charitable Foundat’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 7 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2023, the last year Sokolof Grandchildren Charitable Foundat named its own grantees at scale: 12 organizations, $540k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

19
’17
18
’18
18
’19
16
’20
17
’21
17
’22
12
’23
10
’24
7
’25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Philanthropy$1.7MYouth Development$750kReligion$476kHousing & Shelter$360kInternational$331kCrime & Legal$240kArts & Culture$214kEmployment$210kOther$0
02FY2023 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k14 grants · $240k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $295k
$15,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$10M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JEWISH FEDERATION OF SAN FRANCISCO$185,000
MINNEAPOLIS FOUNDATION$110,300
GIRLS INC OF OMAHA$30,000
NORTHSTAR FOUNDATION$30,000
FILM STREAMS$25,000
PROJECT HARMONY$25,000
CITY OF OMAHA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION$20,000
HERZL CAMP FOUNDATION$15,000
FINANCIAL HOPE COLLABORATION (CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY)$15,000
SIENA FRANCIS HOUSE$15,000
CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF OMAHA INC$15,000
FAMILY HOUSING ADVISORY SERVICES INC$10,000
YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES$10,000
WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT$10,000
AICE INC$10,000
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 (FY17–25, $205k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%YOUTH FRONTIERS INC: $5k → 11%YOUTH FRONTIERS INC: $5k → 11%YOUTH FRONTIERS INC: $5k → 11%YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES: $25k → 12%YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES: $15k → 12%WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $15k → 12%WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $10k → 12%WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $10k → 12%WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $10k → 12%WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $10k → 12%WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $10k → 12%WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $10k → 12%YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES: $10k → 12%WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $10k → 12%WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $10k → 12%YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES: $8k → 12%YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES: $8k → 12%YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES: $8k → 12%YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES: $8k → 12%YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES: $8k → 12%YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES: $8k → 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.
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 27% of Sokolof Grandchildren Charitable Foundat’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Sokolof Grandchildren Charitable Foundatlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.3M · 22 repeat orgs$41k to everyone else

22 repeat relationships: 15 still active in FY2023, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call). Read against FY2023, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
2

Total granted

$3.3M
$13k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+32%
+83%

Still filing today

82%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $28k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Youth DevelopmentInternationalHuman ServicesHousing & ShelterCrime & LegalReligionOther
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

  • NF
    NORTHSTAR FOUNDATION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $260k · revenue +82%
  • PH
    PROJECT HARMONY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $240k · revenue +117%
  • OP
    OMAHA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $157k · revenue +80%

Funded once

  • OS
    OMAHA SMALL BUSINESS NETWORK INC
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • OB
    OMAHA BY DESIGNgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $3k · revenue +83%
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
Jewish Federation of Omaha Foundation

To conduct and support activities for the benefit of the jewish federation of omaha.

Philanthropy
2
National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors

Empowering financial professionals and consumers through world-class advocacy and education.

—
3
Jewish Family and Children's Service of Minneapolis

Jewish family and children's service of minneapolis provides essential services to people of all ages and backgrounds to sustain healthy relationships, ease suffering and offer support in times of need.

Human Services
4
University of Iowa Facilities Corporation

The university of iowa facilities corporation acquires and holds property for the benefit and use of the university of iowa.

—
5
Omaha Sports Commission

The mission of the omaha sports commission is to foster a positive socio-economic impact on and a heightened awareness and image of omaha by attracting, hosting, & supporting amateur sporting events.

Recreation & Sports
6
Omaha Economic Development Corporation

The mission of oedc is to implement economic development projects, housing, and community revitalization programs that create jobs, business ownership opportunities and other economic benefits for area residents.

—
7
Great Mn Schools

We believe that great schools are the cornerstone of a just and thriving community. ensuring that every child is able to attend a school that works is our moral and social imperative - our children deserve no less.

Education
8
Omaha Community Foundation

To serve the community by cultivating generosity and strengthening nonprofits.

Philanthropy
9
Share Omaha

Our mission is to help nonprofits fulfill theirs.

Philanthropy
10
Jewelers of America Inc

Jewelers of america, the most trusted and influential voice of the jewelry industry, empowers and unites its members through expert guidance and advocacy, driving excellence, integrity, and success in an ever-changing marketplace.

—
11
Minneapolis Regional Chamber of Commerce

Creating powerful advocacy to enhance economic vitality in the minneapolis-st. paul region.

—
12
Common Good Iowa

Common good iowa engages iowans to create and advocate for research-based public policy that makes life better and more equitable for all who make iowa home.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Women's Center for Advancement; the most unlike its peers is Youth Emergency Services Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

23 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. 23 of the 28 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/23
Grantees still filing
13/23
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JEWISH FEDERATION OF SAN FRANCISCO: $661,200 · OtherJEWISH FEDERATION OF SAN FRANCISCOFILM STREAMS INC: $214,000 · OtherFILM STREAMS INCOMAHA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION: $157,400 · OtherOMAHA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATIONFINANCIAL HOPE COLLABORATION (CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY): $130,000 · OtherFINANCIAL HOPE COLLABORATION (CREIGHTON …CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF OMAHA INC: $115,000 · OtherCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF…LATINO CENTER OF THE MIDLANDS (CHICANO AWARENESS CENTER INC): $80,000 · OtherWOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $95,000 · OtherWOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENTYOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES INC: $95,000 · OtherYOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES INCHERZL CAMP FOUNDATION: $105,000 · OtherHERZL CAMP FOUNDATION+6 more: $79,600 · OtherTHE MINNEAPOLIS FOUNDATION: $917,300 · PhilanthropyTHE MINNEAPOLIS FOUNDATIONJEWISH FEDERATION OF OMAHA INC: $197,700 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDERATION OF OMAHA…GIRLS INCORPORATED OF OMAHA: $282,500 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS INCORPORATE…NORTHSTAR FOUNDATION: $260,000 · Youth DevelopmentNORTHSTAR FOUNDAT…BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDS: $190,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUB…FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $369,500 · Community ImprovementFIDELITY …SPARK: $19,000 · Community ImprovementAICE INC AMERICAN-ISRAELI COOPERATIVE ENTERPRISE: $132,300 · InternationalBIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION: $115,000 · InternationalAMERICAN ISRAEL EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $84,000 · InternationalFAMILY HOUSING ADVISORY SERVICES: $160,000 · Housing & ShelterSIENA FRANCIS HOUSE: $105,000 · Housing & ShelterPROJECT HARMONY: $240,000 · Crime & Legal
Other$1,732,200Philanthropy$1,115,000Youth Development$732,500Community Improvement$388,500International$331,300Housing & Shelter$265,000Crime & Legal$240,000

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 budgetTHE MINNEAPOLIS FOUNDATION: $917,300 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $369,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF OMAHA: $282,500 over 9y, 1.0% of budgetNORTHSTAR FOUNDATION: $260,000 over 9y, 0.9% of budgetPROJECT HARMONY: $240,000 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetFILM STREAMS INC: $214,000 over 8y, 1.1% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF OMAHA INC: $197,700 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDS: $190,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetFAMILY HOUSING ADVISORY SERVICES: $160,000 over 9y, 0.7% of budgetOMAHA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION: $157,400 over 8y, 6.6% of budgetAICE INC AMERICAN-ISRAELI COOPERATIVE ENTERPRISE: $132,300 over 9y, 7.9% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF OMAHA INC: $115,000 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetBIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION: $115,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetHERZL CAMP FOUNDATION: $105,000 over 7y, 1.4% of budgetSIENA FRANCIS HOUSE: $105,000 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetWOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $95,000 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetYOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES INC: $95,000 over 9y, 0.6% of budgetAMERICAN ISRAEL EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $84,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetEDUCARE OF OMAHA INC: $21,600 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetSPARK: $19,000 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetYOUTH FRONTIERS INC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetOMAHA SMALL BUSINESS NETWORK INC: $9,500 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetOMAHA BY DESIGN: $3,000 over 1y, 0.4% 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 THE MINNEAPOLIS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF OMAHA ↗
  • Who funds NORTHSTAR FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT HARMONY ↗
  • Who funds FILM STREAMS INC ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF OMAHA INC ↗
  • Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDS ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY HOUSING ADVISORY SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds OMAHA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds AICE INC AMERICAN-ISRAELI COOPERATIVE ENTERPRISE ↗
  • Who funds CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF OMAHA INC ↗
  • Who funds BIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds HERZL CAMP FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SIENA FRANCIS HOUSE ↗
  • Who funds WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT ↗
  • Who funds YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN ISRAEL EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds EDUCARE OF OMAHA INC ↗
  • Who funds SPARK ↗
  • Who funds YOUTH FRONTIERS INC ↗
  • Who funds OMAHA SMALL BUSINESS NETWORK INC ↗
  • Who funds OMAHA BY DESIGN ↗

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 Lozier FoundationThe Sherwood Foundati…Robert B Daugherty Fo…The Charles and Mary …Weitz Family Foundati…The Kavich Family Cha…Growing Good Foundati…Mutual of Omaha Found…The Hawks FoundationNebraska Community Fo…Dixon Family Foundati…Richard Brooke Founda…
The Lozier FoundationNE32.3× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Lozier Foundation · The Sherwood Foundation · Robert B Daugherty Foundation · The Charles and Mary Heider Family Foundation · Weitz Family Foundation · The Kavich Family Charitable Foundation · Growing Good Foundation · Mutual of Omaha Foundation · The Hawks Foundation · Nebraska Community Foundation · Dixon Family Foundation · Richard Brooke 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 Sokolof Grandchildren Charitable Foundat funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Sokolof Grandchildren Charitable Foundat. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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 28 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Sokolof Grandchildren Charitable Foundat’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