Skip to content
The Emanuel Apex Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

The Emanuel Apex Foundation Inc

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.

$15k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0179% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$1.7MPublic Safety & Disaster$200kHealth$106kEducation$5kFood & Nutrition$4kArts & Culture$2kOther$0
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$15,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$15,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 84% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%Congregation Ohaiv Yisroel: $26k → 14%CONG KOLLEL BEIRACH MOSHE: $14k → 14%NOTZER CHESED: $235k → 20%Aid L'shalom: $18k → 28%Torah Encounters: $26k → 12%HATZOLAH EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES: $200k → 11%Cong Khal Torath Chaim Viznitz: $25k → 14%KOLLEL OHR YAKOV YOSEF: $80k → 20%Torah Encounters: $15k → 12%Yungeleit of Beth Medrash Govoha: $75k → 11%Congregation Bais Chinuch Ateres Bn: $25k → 14%NOTZER CHESED: $25k → 20%Yeshiva Kol Torah: $36k → 11%Congregation Ohaiv Yisroel: $17k → 14%VARIOUS: $33k → 20%Yeshiva Kol Torah: $36k → 11%Congregation Ohaiv Yisroel: $15k → 14%Congregation YL South 8: $15k → 20%Congregation Ohaiv Yisroel: $13k → 14%Congregation Ohaiv Yisroel: $12k → 14%Various Cahrities: $175k → 20%BROOKLYN REHABILITATION FOUNDATION: $106k → 20%Various Cahrities: $82k → 20%LEV HAEVRIE: $50k → 20%MOSDOT OHEL YISROEL INC: $36k → 20%CONG BAIS SINAI: $25k → 20%Zichron Shlome Refuah Fund: $20k → 20%Gomel Chesed: $15k → 20%KIPAS AHAVAS SHULEM: $15k → 20%BNOS ZION OF BOBOV INC: $11k → 20%BNEI TZION OF BOBOV: $11k → 20%CONGREGATION CHASIDEI BELZ: $10k → 20%CONGREGATION CHASIDEI BELZ: $10k → 20%BNOS ZION OF BOBOV INC: $10k → 20%Yeshiva Machzikai Hadas: $200k → 20%CONG YESHIVA MACHZIKEI HADAS: $142k → 20%CONG YESHIVA MACHZIKEI HADAS: $130k → 20%Yeshiva Machzikai Hadas: $100k → 20%MOSDOS SPINKA: $80k → 20%CONG YESHIVA MACHZIKEI HADAS: $50k → 20%CONG YESHIVA MACHZIKEI HADAS: $28k → 20%KOLEL ASIKE SHMATASA: $20k → 20%Chasdei Eliezer: $18k → 20%Yeshiva Torah Vodaath: $10k → 20%MASORES BEIS YAAKOV: $21k → 20%MASORES BEIS YAAKOV: $19k → 20%MASORES BEIS YAAKOV: $18k → 20%MASORES BEIS YAAKOV: $17k → 20%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.

64%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.6M · 16 repeat orgs$911k to everyone else

16 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 15 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
29

Total granted

$1.6M
$911k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+134%
+149%

Still filing today

19%
14%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
InternationalYouth DevelopmentPublic Safety & DisasterEducationFood & NutritionReligionOther
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

  • YK
    YESHIVA KOL TORAH INC
    3× · 2018–2021 · $74k · revenue +48%
  • TE
    TORAH ENCOUNTERS INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $41k · revenue +841%
  • TS
    TOMCHEI SHABBOS D'LAKEWOOD INC
    2× · 2018–2019 · $4k · revenue +134%

Funded once

  • HE
    HATZOLAH EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICESgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $200k · revenue +162%
  • BR
    BROOKLYN REHABILITATION FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $106k
  • MS
    MOSDOS SPINKA
    one grant, 2018 · $80k
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

7 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2024.

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 2024, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 7 of the 45 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
5/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONG YESHIVA MACHZIKEI HADAS: $349,500 · OtherCONG YESHIVA MACHZIKEI HADASIndividual grant recipient: $300,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientNOTZER CHESED: $260,000 · OtherNOTZER CHESEDVarious Cahrities: $256,418 · OtherVarious CahritiesBROOKLYN REHABILITATION FOUNDATION: $105,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $82,700 · OtherMOSDOS SPINKA: $80,000 · OtherKOLLEL OHR YAKOV YOSEF: $80,000 · OtherYungeleit of Beth Medrash Govoha: $75,000 · OtherMASORES BAIS YAAKOV: $74,650 · Other+28 more: $513,024 · Other+28 moreHATZOLAH EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES: $200,000 · Public Safety & DisasterYESHIVA KOL TORAH INC: $73,800 · EducationTORAH ENCOUNTERS INC: $41,000 · Youth DevelopmentMOSDOT OHEL YISROEL INC: $35,500 · International+1 more: $1,000 · InternationalTZUR FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 · ReligionTOMCHEI SHABBOS D'LAKEWOOD INC: $3,600 · Food & Nutrition
Other$2,176,792Public Safety & Disaster$200,000Education$73,800Youth Development$41,000International$36,500Religion$5,000Food & Nutrition$3,600

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHATZOLAH EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES: $200,000 over 1y, 7.0% of budgetYESHIVA KOL TORAH INC: $73,800 over 3y, 2.2% of budgetTORAH ENCOUNTERS INC: $41,000 over 2y, 5.8% of budgetMOSDOT OHEL YISROEL INC: $35,500 over 1y, 18% of budgetTOMCHEI SHABBOS D'LAKEWOOD INC: $3,600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSHAAREI SHMUOS INC: $1,000 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 HATZOLAH EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA KOL TORAH INC ↗
  • Who funds TORAH ENCOUNTERS INC ↗
  • Who funds MOSDOT OHEL YISROEL INC ↗
  • Who funds TZUR FOUNDATION INC ↗

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 Ojc FundB&M Steinmetz Foundat…Donors Fund IncJack Adjmi Family Fou…S&E FoundationJewish Communal FundNational Philanthropi…Fidelity Investments …Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
The Ojc FundNY38.3× affinity20 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · B&M Steinmetz Foundation · Donors Fund Inc · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · S&E Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Emanuel Apex Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Emanuel Apex Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →median 3%
  • Yeshiva Kol Torah Inc: 3% 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 · 0–60%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to The Emanuel Apex Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to The Emanuel Apex Foundation Inc 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 45 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 Emanuel Apex’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