Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Alex Charitable Trust

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.

$40k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$108kEducation$89kHealth$15kEmployment$11kPhilanthropy$7kYouth Development$6kAnimals$4kEnvironment$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k11 grants · $15k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $25k
$1,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$476k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Southern Connecticut Hebrew Academy$15,000
Cole Chabad$10,000
Rock Hill Elementary School$3,500
Church Street School$3,000
Dag Hammarskjold Middle School$1,500
Canines for Disabled Kids$1,250
Cardinal Shehan Center$1,000
NIVIC$1,000
JCC of Greater New Haven$1,000
Laugeni Family Foundation$1,000
One Big Dog Arf Inc$500
Bushnell Center for Performing Arts$500
Individual grant recipient$400
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 45% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 12%Canines for Disabled Kids: $1k → 11%Friends of Navdanya: $1k → 12%Cole Chabad: $10k → 20%Cardinal Sheehan Center: $2k → 9%Bushnell Center for Performing Arts: $500 → 11%Yale University: $10k → 12%Arms Wide Open Childhood Cancer Foundation: $500 → 6%NVIC: $1k → 4%Canines for Disabled Kids: $1k → 11%Torah Education in Israel: $15k → 17%Yeshivat Ateret Torah: $18k → 20%Cardinal Shehan Center: $1k → 9%Yale University: $5k → 12%NIVIC: $1k → 4%Yeshivat Ateret Torah: $18k → 20%Cardinal Shehan Center: $1k → 9%Church Street School: $3k → 12%NIVIC: $1k → 4%Yeshivat Ateret Torah: $12k → 20%Cardinal Shehan Center: $1k → 9%JCC of Greater New Haven: $7k → 12%Yeshivat Ateret Torah: $10k → 20%Cardinal Shehan Center: $1k → 9%Southern Connecticut Hebrew Academy: $15k → 12%Yeshivat Ateret Torah: $10k → 20%Laugeni Family Foundation: $3k → 12%Congregation Ezras Yisroel: $10k → 20%Southern Connecticut Hebrew Academy: $13k → 12%American Friends of Midreshet: $5k → 20%Laugeni Family Foundation: $3k → 12%Southern Connecticut Hebrew Academy: $10k → 12%JCC of Greater New Haven: $1k → 12%Construction Workforce Initiative 2 Inc: $6k → 12%Southern Connecticut Hebrew Academy: $5k → 12%Laugeni Family Foundation: $1k → 12%Construction Workforce Initiative 2 Inc: $3k → 12%Southern CT Hebrew Academy: $2k → 12%Laugeni Family Foundation: $1k → 12%Construction Workforce Initiative 2 Inc: $1k → 12%New Haven Hebrew Day School: $2k → 12%Construction Workforce Initiative 2 Inc: $800 → 12%New Haven Hebrew Day School: $1k → 12%Rock Hill Elementary School: $5k → 12%MYB PTO: $5k → 12%Rock Hill Elementary School: $4k → 12%Moses Y Beach Elementary School: $3k → 12%Rock Hill Elementary School: $3k → 12%Dag Hammarskjold Middle School: $2k → 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

67%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$166k · 12 repeat orgs$82k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
13

Total granted

$166k
$67k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-30%
+21%

Still filing today

42%
8%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 61% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k 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
HealthPhilanthropyAnimalsInternationalOther
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

  • AT
    ATERET TORAH CENTER
    5× · 2018–2022 · $68k
  • SC
    Southern Connecticut Hebrew Academy
    4× · 2022–2025 · $43k
  • CW
    CONSTRUCTION WORKFORCE INITIATIVE 2
    4× · 2020–2023 · $11k

Funded once

  • TE
    Torah Education in Israel
    one grant, 2017 · $15k
  • YU
    YALE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
  • CE
    CONGREGATION EZRAS YISROEL
    one grant, 2019 · $10k
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
04the grantee network

6 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. 6 of the 30 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
3/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ATERET TORAH CENTER: $67,500 · OtherATERET TORAH CENTERSouthern Connecticut Hebrew Academy: $43,254 · OtherSouthern Connecticut Hebrew AcademyTorah Education in Israel: $15,000 · OtherTorah Education in IsraelCONSTRUCTION WORKFORCE INITIATIVE 2: $11,100 · OtherRock Hill Elementary School: $11,000 · OtherYALE UNIVERSITY: $10,000 · OtherCONGREGATION EZRAS YISROEL: $10,000 · OtherCole Chabad: $10,000 · OtherYale University Discovery to Cure: $10,000 · OtherJCC of Greater New Haven: $8,000 · Other+16 more: $39,225 · Other+16 moreTHE LAUGENI FAMILY FOUNDATION: $7,000 · PhilanthropyCANINES FOR DISABLED KIDS INC: $2,750 · AnimalsFRIENDS OF NAVDANYA INC: $2,500 · InternationalARMS WIDE OPEN CHILDHOOD CANCER FOUNDATION: $500 · Health
Other$235,079Philanthropy$7,000Animals$2,750International$2,500Health$500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE LAUGENI FAMILY FOUNDATION: $7,000 over 4y, 93% of budgetCARDINAL SHEHAN CENTER INC: $5,625 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetCANINES FOR DISABLED KIDS INC: $2,750 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetNEW HAVEN HEBREW DAY SCHOOL INC: $2,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF NAVDANYA INC: $2,500 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetARMS WIDE OPEN CHILDHOOD CANCER FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.1% 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 LAUGENI FAMILY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds CARDINAL SHEHAN CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds CANINES FOR DISABLED KIDS INC ↗
  • Who funds NEW HAVEN HEBREW DAY SCHOOL INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF NAVDANYA INC ↗
  • Who funds ARMS WIDE OPEN CHILDHOOD CANCER FOUNDATION ↗

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 Bank of America Charitable Foundation IncNC7.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 The Alex Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Alex Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →median 4%
  • Cardinal Shehan Center Inc: 4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
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 30 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 Alex’s filings →

More from the funding graph