Skip to content
Sybil & Robert Sheinkopf Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Sybil & Robert Sheinkopf 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.

$13k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Health$220kInternational$110kReligion$100kAnimals$50kPublic Benefit$30kPhilanthropy$30kArts & Culture$10kOther$0
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $3k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$39k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CAPE COD SYNAGOGUE$10,000
JEWISH FEDERATION OF S PALM BEACH$2,500
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 (FY17–21, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%ISRAEL GUIDE DOG CENTER FOR: $10k → 6%ISRAEL GUIDE DOG CENTER FOR: $10k → 6%ISRAEL GUIDE DOG CENTER FOR: $10k → 6%ISRAEL GUIDE DOG CENTER: $5k → 6%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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

71%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$452k · 10 repeat orgs$188k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
9

Total granted

$452k
$185k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
+92%

Still filing today

30%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalHuman ServicesHealthArts & CultureOther
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

  • IG
    ISRAEL GUIDE DOG CENTER FOR THE BLIND
    4× · 2017–2021 · $35k · revenue +36%
  • CF
    Central Fund of Israel
    2× · 2017–2020 · $30k · revenue +145%
  • RE
    RESEARCH - EVAL - PROMOTING ORG RESPON & TRANSPARENCY - REPORT - INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $30k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $100k
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF ISRAEL DISABLED VETERANS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $15k · revenue +114%
  • FF
    FIDV FRIENDS OF DISABLED VETRANS
    one grant, 2019 · $15k
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
Idf Memorial Foundation
Philanthropy
2
Sherit Isroel
—
3
Israel Initiative 2020 Inc
International
4
American Friends of Ish El Rayahu

To promote, benefit, and support Jewish religious, charitable & educational activities in Israel and the USA.

Religion
5
University of Judaism Foundation
—
6
American Friends of Israel Emergency Aid Fund

To provide funding for medical and humanitarian projects throughout israel. the organization might make grants to other organizations providing such services, including, but not limited to, evp israel and israel emergency aid fund, israeli…

Public Safety & Disaster
7
Voices United for Israel

Educational information regarding Israel and the Middle East.

International
8
Israel Select Charity Fund Inc

Helping individuals and organizations with great needs and little resources and with often few options.

Human Services
9
Physicians for Palestine
Health
10
The Israel Independence Fund

To raise and distribute funds for charitable organizations with the goal to strengthen the jewish and zionist spirit of the state of israel.

Philanthropy
11
Us Israel Education Fund Inc
—
12
Israel Medical Fund Corp

To provide guidance and support to families with ill or physically disabled family members

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pef Israel Endowment Funds Inc; the most unlike its peers is Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc. 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

10 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. 10 of the 22 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
8/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CAPE COD HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION: $110,000 · OtherCAPE COD HEALTHCARE FOUNDATIONMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATED: $105,000 · OtherMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATEDIndividual grant recipient: $100,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCAPE COD SYNAGOGUE INC: $55,000 · OtherCAPE COD SYNAGOGUE INCIndividual grant recipient: $32,046 · OtherIndividual grant recipientFREINDS OF UNITED HATZALAH: $30,000 · OtherFREINDS OF UNITED HATZALAH+6 more: $62,810 · Other+6 moreCentral Fund of Israel: $30,000 · InternationalCentral Fund of…RESEARCH - EVAL - PROMOTING ORG RESPON & TRANSPARENCY - REPORT - INC: $30,000 · InternationalRESEARCH - EVAL…FRIENDS OF ISRAEL DISABLED VETERANS INC: $15,000 · InternationalFRIENDS OF ISRA…Adi Israel Foundation Inc: $10,000 · InternationalAdi Israel Foun…AMERICAN FRIENDS OF LIBI INC: $10,000 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIEND…PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $30,000 · PhilanthropyTHE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $12,000 · PhilanthropyISRAEL GUIDE DOG CENTER FOR THE BLIND: $35,000 · Human ServicesFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $10,000 · Arts & CultureDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $5,000 · Health
Other$494,856International$95,000Philanthropy$42,000Human Services$35,000Arts & Culture$10,000Health$5,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetISRAEL GUIDE DOG CENTER FOR THE BLIND: $35,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetCentral Fund of Israel: $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetRESEARCH - EVAL - PROMOTING ORG RESPON & TRANSPARENCY - REPORT - INC: $30,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetFRIENDS OF ISRAEL DISABLED VETERANS INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $12,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAdi Israel Foundation Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF LIBI INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $5,000 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 ISRAEL GUIDE DOG CENTER FOR THE BLIND ↗
  • Who funds Central Fund of Israel ↗
  • Who funds PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC ↗
  • Who funds RESEARCH - EVAL - PROMOTING ORG RESPON & TRANSPARENCY - REPORT - INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF ISRAEL DISABLED VETERANS INC ↗
  • Who funds THE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds Adi Israel Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF LIBI INC ↗
  • Who funds Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Sybil & Robert Sheinkopf Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Sybil & Robert Sheinkopf Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
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 22 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 Sybil & Robert Sheinkopf 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