Skip to content
The Herman & Kate Caro Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Herman & Kate Caro 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.

$53k
Granted FY2025still arriving
19
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$35k
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 2025.

Religion$231kInternational$99kHealth$84kPublic Safety & Disaster$32kArts & Culture$16kPhilanthropy$11kCivil Rights$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k18 grants · $18k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $35k
$500
Median grant
2
States reached
$789k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EILAT CHARITIES$35,300
MACHON MORESHES ASHKENAZ$5,000
CONGREGATION KNESETH ISRAEL$3,000
BIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION$1,000
ZAKA SEARCH & RESCUE$1,000
FRIENDS OF YAD SARAH$1,000
FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES$1,000
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM$1,000
HYDROCEPHALUS ASSOCIATION$500
AMERICAN JEWISH JOINT DISTRIBUTION COMMITTEE INC$500
AMIT WOMEN$500
FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH$500
HATZALAH OF THE ROCKAWAYS AND NASSAU COUNTY$500
A TORAH INFERTILITY MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE$500
UJA FEDERATION OF NY$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 (FY25–25, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, 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%A TORAH INFERTILITY MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE: $500 → 20%ZAKA SEARCH & RESCUE: $1k → 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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$466k · 18 repeat orgs$22k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +17% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

18 repeat relationships: 17 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
2

Total granted

$466k
$20k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+17%
0%

Still filing today

78%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k 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
InternationalReligionHealthHuman ServicesPublic Safety & DisasterPhilanthropyOther
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
    EILAT CHARITIES INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $142k · revenue +143%
  • AC
    AMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC
    4× · 2017–2022 · $40k · revenue +89%
  • MM
    MACHON MORESHES ASHKENAZ
    6× · 2020–2025 · $38k · revenue +54%

Funded once

  • YS
    YESHIVA SHOLOM SHACHNA
    one grant, 2017 · $15k
  • ZN
    ZAKA NORTH INC
    one grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue 0%
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
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
3
Idf Memorial Foundation
Philanthropy
4
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
5
Aishel Hatzedek
International
6
The Jerusalem Connection
—
7
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
8
University of Judaism Foundation
—
9
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
10
Moskowitz Prize for Zionism Inc
—
11
Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation
Philanthropy
12
Vaad Hapula Inc

Support jewry in Israel

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Birthright Israel Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Hydrocephalus Association. 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

17 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. 17 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
10/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

EILAT CHARITIES INC: $142,300 · ReligionEILAT CHARITIES INCMACHON MORESHES ASHKENAZ: $37,500 · ReligionMACHON MORESHES ASHKENAZ+1 more: $5,000 · ReligionAMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC: $40,000 · InternationalAMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZE…AMIT CHILDREN INC: $36,000 · InternationalAMIT CHILDREN INCAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $27,500 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID …FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $21,000 · InternationalFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FO…The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc: $8,000 · InternationalThe American Jewish Joint Distri…BIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION: $6,000 · InternationalCONGREGATION KNESETH ISRAEL: $25,500 · OtherCONGREGATION KNESE…YESHIVA SHOLOM SHACHNA: $15,000 · OtherYESHIVA SHOLOM SHA…YESHIVAS CHSAN SOFER INC: $10,750 · OtherYESHIVAS CHSAN SOF…Individual grant recipient: $10,500 · OtherIndividual grant r…ALZHEIMER'S ASSOCIATION: $8,750 · OtherALZHEIMER'S ASSOCI…ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $5,500 · OtherANTI-DEFAMATION LE…+2 more: $1,500 · OtherFRIENDS OF YAD SARAH INC: $26,000 · HealthHYDROCEPHALUS ASSOCIATION: $9,000 · HealthHATZALAH OF THE ROCKAWAYS & NASSAU COUNTY INC: $25,500 · Public Safety & DisasterFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $15,500 · Arts & CultureUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC: $10,500 · Philanthropy
Religion$184,800International$138,500Other$77,500Health$35,000Public Safety & Disaster$25,500Arts & Culture$15,500Philanthropy$10,500

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 budgetEILAT CHARITIES INC: $142,300 over 7y, 5.6% of budgetAMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC: $40,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetMACHON MORESHES ASHKENAZ: $37,500 over 6y, 7.0% of budgetAMIT CHILDREN INC: $36,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $27,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF YAD SARAH INC: $26,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetHATZALAH OF THE ROCKAWAYS & NASSAU COUNTY INC: $25,500 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $21,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $15,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC: $10,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetHYDROCEPHALUS ASSOCIATION: $9,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetThe American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc: $8,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION: $6,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $5,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetZAKA NORTH INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $500 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.

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 Communal FundThe Ojc FundVanguard Charitable E…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Jewish Communal FundNY17.6× affinity7 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · The Ojc Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Herman & Kate Caro Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Herman & Kate Caro Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–15%
    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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Herman & Kate Caro’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