Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Harry M & Gertrude y Schwartz Foundation

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.

$54k
Granted FY2018
28
Grants FY2018
5
States reached
$10k
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

79% of The Harry M & Gertrude y Schwartz Foundation’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 FY2018, the last year The Harry M & Gertrude y Schwartz Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 14 organizations, $54k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

17
’17
14
’18
5
’21
4
’22
4
’23
5
’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$1.1MReligion$157kEducation$51kEnvironment$45kHealth$24kHousing & Shelter$21kHuman Services$7kFood & Nutrition$2kOther$0
02FY2018 · 28 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2018

  • Under $10k26 grants · $34k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
$1,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$2.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CLEAN ENERGY TRUST$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
SIXTH & I HISTORIC SYNAGOGUE$3,600
MORIAH CONGREGATION$3,400
TEMPLE EMANUEL (WASHINGTON DC)$2,900
CONGREGATION BETH JUDEA$2,500
STANFORD LAW SCHOOL$2,500
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LAW$2,500
UNIV OF CHICAGO COLLEGE FUND$2,500
SECOND SENSE$2,000
HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE$1,800
BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY$1,500
INVEST FOR KIDS$1,000
INTONATION MUSIC$1,000
WATERS TODAY$1,000
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 (FY17–18, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT: $500 → 17%INVEST FOR KIDS: $1k → 14%INVEST FOR KIDS: $1k → 14%SHALVA: $750 → 14%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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
WI
NY
OH
CA
MO
WV
MD
AR
TN
DC
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 77% of The Harry M & Gertrude y Schwartz Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Harry M & Gertrude y Schwartz Foundationlessmore 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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$227k · 23 repeat orgs$82k to everyone else

23 repeat relationships: 18 still active in FY2018, 5 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2018 (too recent to call). Read against FY2018, 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

23
16

Total granted

$227k
$71k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+26%
+82%

Still filing today

39%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthReligionFood & NutritionEducationArts & 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

  • EC
    EVERGREEN CLIMATE INNOVATIONS
    3× · 2017–2022 · $45k · revenue +56%
  • SS
    SECOND SENSE
    2× · 2017–2018 · $9k · revenue +12%
  • SI
    SIXTH & I SYNAGOGUE INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $4k · revenue +26%

Funded once

  • AI
    ADAS ISRAEL CONG- WASHINGTON
    one grant, 2017 · $23k
  • UO
    UNIV OF CHICAGO-URBAN EDUC INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2017 · $20k
  • CF
    CENTER FOR CREATIVE CHANGE
    one grant, 2017 · $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

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
Yeshiva University

The university is composed of several colleges and schools providing undergraduate, graduate, professional and post-doctoral education and training and research and clinical programs.

Education
2
Food Allergy Science Initiative Inc

To accelerate the development of breakthrough discoveries that will transform the lives of people living with food allergies.

—
3
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
4
Us Middle East Project Inc

The organization's mission is to engage in non partisan analysis of u.s. foreign policy in the middle east, with special emphasis on the middle east peace process, and to present policymakers in the united states, in the region and in the…

International
5
Target Als Foundation Inc

Our mission is to break down barriers to als research to find effective treatments. by uniting academia, the pharma and biotech industry, government, venture capital, related nonprofits, and the als community, we aim to overcome the…

Education
6
Bar Ilan University in Israel Inc

Biu produces students who excel in the sciences, humanities, law, engineering, business & the arts.

—
7
The Lieber Institute Inc

The mission of the institute is to translate basic genetic and molecular mechanisms of schizophrenia and related developmental brain disorders into clinical advances that change the lives of affected individuals. it is catalyzing a new…

Health
8
Albert Einstein College of Medicine

Committed to exceptional healthcare quality for all and actively engaged with our community, einstein drives scientific discovery and educates compassionate leaders in health and science.

Education
9
New York Genome Center Inc

Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.

Health
10
Institute for Advanced Study - Louis Bamberger & Mrs Felix Fuld Foundation

The institute for advanced study (the institute) is one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry. see schedule o.

Science & Tech
11
The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum

Chartered by a unanimous act of congress, the museum is america's national institution for the documentation, study, interpretation, and education of holocaust history and serves as our country's memorial to the victims of the holocaust.…

Arts & Culture
12
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is East Tennessee Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Meals On Wheels. 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

24 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. 24 of the 57 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)
23/24
Grantees still filing
19/24
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $1,110,000 · Community ImprovementFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUNDADAS ISRAEL CONG- WASHINGTON: $23,000 · OtherADAS ISRAEL CON…UNIV OF CHICAGO-URBAN EDUC INSTITUTE: $20,000 · OtherUNIV OF CHICAGO…Individual grant recipient: $20,000 · OtherIndividual gran…MORIAH CONGREGATION: $17,050 · OtherMORIAH CONGREGA…TEMPLE EMANUEL: $15,273 · OtherTEMPLE EMANUELCONGREGATION BETH SHALOM: $12,434 · OtherCONGREGATION BE…CONGREGATION OR SHALOM OF LAKE COUNTY: $12,300 · OtherCONGREGATION OR…MISHKAN CHICAGO: $10,007 · OtherCENTER FOR CREATIVE CHANGE: $10,000 · OtherSECOND SENSE: $9,000 · Other+35 more: $53,570 · Other+35 moreHILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $50,000 · ReligionSIXTH & I SYNAGOGUE INC: $4,100 · ReligionEVERGREEN CLIMATE INNOVATIONS: $45,000 · EnvironmentTHE JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER WASHINGTON INC: $30,000 · Philanthropy+1 more: $1,000 · PhilanthropyFriends of Waters: $3,500 · EducationTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $2,500 · EducationCENTER FOR CREATIVE CHANGE: $500 · EducationALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $2,000 · HealthAnn & Robert H Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago Foundation: $1,000 · HealthBREAKTHROUGH T1D: $600 · Health
Community Improvement$1,110,000Other$202,634Religion$54,100Environment$45,000Philanthropy$31,000Education$6,500Health$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$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $1,110,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $50,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEVERGREEN CLIMATE INNOVATIONS: $45,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetTHE JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER WASHINGTON INC: $30,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSECOND SENSE: $9,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetSIXTH & I SYNAGOGUE INC: $4,100 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFriends of Waters: $3,500 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBEN AND ESTHER ROSENBLOOM HILLEL CENTER FOR JEWISH LIFE AT UNIVERSITY OF MD: $1,800 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSARAH'S CIRCLE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINTONATION MUSIC WORKSHOP: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAnn & Robert H Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago Foundation: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEAST TENNESSEE FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSHALVA INC: $750 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBREAKTHROUGH T1D: $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER FOR CREATIVE CHANGE: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLAKE COUNTY CRISIS CENTER: $350 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN SOCIETY FOR YAD VASHEM INC: $200 over 2y, 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 FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND ↗
  • Who funds HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE ↗
  • Who funds EVERGREEN CLIMATE INNOVATIONS ↗
  • Who funds THE JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER WASHINGTON INC ↗
  • Who funds SECOND SENSE ↗
  • Who funds SIXTH & I SYNAGOGUE INC ↗
  • Who funds Friends of Waters ↗
  • Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds Invest for Kids Inc ↗
  • Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds BEN AND ESTHER ROSENBLOOM HILLEL CENTER FOR JEWISH LIFE AT UNIVERSITY OF MD ↗
  • Who funds GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY ↗
  • Who funds SARAH'S CIRCLE ↗
  • Who funds INTONATION MUSIC WORKSHOP ↗
  • Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS ↗
  • Who funds Ann & Robert H Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago Foundation ↗
  • Who funds EAST TENNESSEE 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.

Jewish Federation of Metropolitan ChicagoIL21.2× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · The Chicago Community Trust · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · The Jewish Federation of Greater Washington Inc · Circle of Service Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · T Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Endowment 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 Harry M & Gertrude y Schwartz Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Harry M & Gertrude y Schwartz Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%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
    10report 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 57 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 2018, released 2018. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Harry M & Gertrude y Schwartz’s filings →

    More from the funding graph