Skip to content
The Charles and Edna Levine Family Foundationinc at a glance

· Private foundation

The Charles and Edna Levine Family Foundationinc

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.

$27k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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.

Food & Nutrition$107kInternational$37kCivil Rights$23kHealth$18kReligion$16kPhilanthropy$5kHuman Services$4kEducation$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,800
Median grant
6
States reached
$385k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PEF - ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS FOR HALACHA BERURA INSTITUTE$5,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FOUNDATION OF AMERICA$3,000
ALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK$3,000
JEWISH COMMUNITY RELATIONS COUNCIL$3,000
PEF - ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS FOR KEHILAT BORCHA YERUSHALAIM$2,500
FRIENDS OF THE IDF$1,800
AHAVAS YISRAEL CHARITY FUND$1,800
CHASDAY NAOMI USA FRIENDS$1,800
MD FOOD BANK$1,800
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET ISRAEL$1,500
STAND WITH US$1,000
NETIVOT SHALOM$800
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, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CHASDAY NAOMY USA FRIENDS: $2k → 16%CHASDAY NAOMI USA FRIENDS: $2k → 16%CHASDAY NAOMY USA FRIENDS: $2k → 16%CHASDAY NAOMY USA FRIENDS: $2k → 16%CHASDAY NAOMY USA FRIENDS: $2k → 16%CHASDAY NAOMY USA FRIENDS: $2k → 16%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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$179k · 20 repeat orgs$16k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +45% since the first grant, against +20% for those funded once.

20 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
7

Total granted

$179k
$13k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+45%
+20%

Still filing today

55%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k 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
InternationalHuman ServicesPhilanthropyPublic Safety & DisasterEducationHealthOther
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

  • ALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK
    8× · 2018–2025 · $23k · revenue +118%
  • RC
    RABBI CHAIM KOWALSKY MEMORIAL AHAVAS YISRAEL FUND INC
    7× · 2017–2025 · $13k · revenue +92%
  • JC
    JEWISH COMMUNITY RELATIONS COUNCIL OF SAN FRANCISCO MARIN & PENINSULA
    5× · 2021–2025 · $13k · revenue +34%

Funded once

  • AG
    AMERICA GIVES INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $3k · revenue +216%
  • EM
    EZER MIZION
    one grant, 2018 · $3k · revenue -9%
  • AL
    Anti-Defamation League
    one grant, 2018 · $3k
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
Sherit Isroel
—
2
Idf Memorial Foundation
Philanthropy
3
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
4
University of Judaism Foundation
—
5
Yad Ezra V'shulamit

Yad ezra v'shulamit's mission is to provide over 300,000 people in israel with food and basic supplies for those living in poverty by distributing 12,000 weekly food baskets. with a focus on children we try to ensure that hundreds of…

International
6
Moskowitz Prize for Zionism Inc
—
7
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
8
Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation
Philanthropy
9
Chesed Aharon
Philanthropy
10
Yad Laniyim
Philanthropy
11
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
12
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma; the most unlike its peers is Chasday Naomi Usa Friends. 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

20 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. 20 of the 32 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
16/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PEF - ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS FOR HALACHA BERURA INSTITUTE: $34,000 · OtherPEF - ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS FOR HALACHA BERURA INSTITUTEALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $22,750 · OtherALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANKRABBI CHAIM KOWALSKY MEMORIAL AHAVAS YISRAEL FUND INC: $13,300 · OtherRABBI CHAIM KOWALSKY MEMORIAL AHAVAS YISRAEL FUND INCNetivot Shalom: $12,900 · OtherNetivot ShalomJEWISH COMMUNITY RELATIONS COUNCIL OF SAN FRANCISCO MARIN & PENINSULA: $12,800 · OtherJEWISH COMMUNITY RELATIONS COUNCIL OF SAN FRANCISCO MARIN & PENINSULAMAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger: $11,250 · OtherMAZON A Jewish Response to HungerACLU: $8,000 · OtherPlanned Parenthood: $7,500 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD FOUNDATION OF AMERICA: $6,000 · OtherLEKET ISRAEL: $5,700 · Other+8 more: $23,300 · Other+8 morePEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $15,000 · PhilanthropyPEF ISRAEL …AMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET ISRAEL INC: $3,000 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN FR…AMERICA GIVES INC: $2,500 · PhilanthropyAMERICA GIV…JEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION OF SAN FRANCISCO THE PENINSULA MARIN & SONOMA: $2,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH COMM…Central Fund of Israel: $9,100 · InternationalEZER MIZION: $2,500 · InternationalJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $2,000 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $1,500 · InternationalISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE: $1,000 · InternationalCHASDAY NAOMI USA FRIENDS: $9,800 · Human ServicesWEEKEND BACKPACKS BALTIMORE INC: $4,000 · Human ServicesMt Washington Pediatric Hospital Inc: $2,000 · HealthALVIN S MINTZES HATZALAH OF BALTIMORE INC: $1,500 · Public Safety & DisasterJEWISH Middle SCHOOL OF NASHVILLE: $1,000 · Education
Other$157,500Philanthropy$22,500International$16,100Human Services$13,800Health$2,000Public Safety & Disaster$1,500Education$1,000

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 budgetALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $22,750 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetPEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetRABBI CHAIM KOWALSKY MEMORIAL AHAVAS YISRAEL FUND INC: $13,300 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY RELATIONS COUNCIL OF SAN FRANCISCO MARIN & PENINSULA: $12,800 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetMAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger: $11,250 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCHASDAY NAOMI USA FRIENDS: $9,800 over 6y, 4.2% of budgetCentral Fund of Israel: $9,100 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetWEEKEND BACKPACKS BALTIMORE INC: $4,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetTHE MARYLAND FOOD BANK INC: $3,100 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET ISRAEL INC: $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICA GIVES INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEZER MIZION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAKIVA SCHOOL: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMt Washington Pediatric Hospital Inc: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION OF SAN FRANCISCO THE PENINSULA MARIN & SONOMA: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALVIN S MINTZES HATZALAH OF BALTIMORE INC: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH Middle SCHOOL OF NASHVILLE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.9% 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.

Herman & Walter Samue…The Jerome G & Annett…American Endowment Fo…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
Herman & Walter Samuelson Foundation IncMD13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Herman & Walter Samuelson Foundation Inc · The Jerome G & Annette S Zimmerman Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Charles and Edna Levine Family Foundationinc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Charles and Edna Levine Family Foundationinc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
  • The Maryland Food Bank Inc: 11% of income from government
  • Mt Washington Pediatric Hospital Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get 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 32 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 Charles and Edna Levine Family Foundationinc’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