Skip to content
The Howard G & Samita B Jacobs Fndtn at a glance

· Private foundation

The Howard G & Samita B Jacobs Fndtn

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$149k
Granted FY2025still arriving
21
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$17k
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, FY2021 to 2024.

Civil Rights$140kPhilanthropy$96kReligion$93kInternational$90kFood & Nutrition$28kCrime & Legal$25kArts & Culture$20kEducation$20kOther$0
02FY2025 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k15 grants · $71k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $78k
$5,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$2.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS$17,000
JEWISH FEDERATION OF SAN DIEGO CTY$16,000
UNION FR REFRMD JUDAISM D SAPERSTN$15,000
NEW ISRAEL FUND$10,000
UNION FOR REFORMED JUDAISM$10,000
MAZON$10,000
JEWISH AGENCY FOR ISRAEL-NORTH$7,000
JDC-AMERICAN JEWISH JOINT DIST COMM$7,000
ISRAEL US GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN FUND$7,000
FRIENDS OF THE IMPJ$5,000
AMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE$5,000
LAWYERS FOR CHILDREN$5,000
CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE$5,000
PUBLIC ART FUND$5,000
SOUTHERN CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS$5,000
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 (FY21–21, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES OF SAN DIEGO: $1k → 11%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

NH
MN
NY
MA
CT
CA
MD
DC
AL
GA
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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$474k · 18 repeat orgs$87k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +8% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

18 repeat relationships: 14 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
9

Total granted

$474k
$61k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
0%

Still filing today

61%
89%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $26k went to new ones.

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

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

’21’22’23’24’25
Civil RightsInternationalHealthHuman ServicesEnvironmentCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • MA
    MAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger
    4× · 2021–2025 · $25k · revenue +10%
  • AL
    ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE
    5× · 2021–2025 · $25k · revenue +34%
  • NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN INCORPORATED
    4× · 2022–2025 · $12k · revenue +48%

Funded once

  • AG
    AMERICA GIVES INC
    one grant, 2024 · $16k · revenue 0%
  • NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC
    one grant, 2021 · $16k · revenue -61%
  • RA
    RELIGIOUS ACTION CENTER
    one grant, 2021 · $15k
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
Committee to Protect Journalists Inc

The committee to protect journalists promotes press freedom worldwide and defends the right of journalists to report the news safely and without fear of reprisal. cpj ensures the free flow of news and commentary by taking action wherever…

Civil Rights
2
American Jewish Committee

AJC's mission is to enhance the wellbeing of the Jewish people and Israel, and to advance human rights and democratic values in the United States and around the world. In pursuit of this mission, AJC advances democratic principles, fights…

Civil Rights
3
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
4
The Jewish Agency for Israel

The jewish agency binds jews across ideologies and civilizations together in a worldwide jewish family with israel at its center. it provides the global framework for aliyah, ensures global jewish safety, strengthens jewish identity and…

—
5
International Center for Research On Women

The international center for research for women (icrw) is a global research institute, with a mission to advance rights and opportunities for women, girls, and structurally excluded populations with actionable evidence and solutions.

International
6
Washington Office On Latin America

To advance human rights and social justice in the americas.

International
7
The International Institute On Race Equality and Human Rights

The international institute on race, equality and human rights contributes to the promotion and defense of human rights, through training, technical assistance, advocacy, and strategic litigation conducted at the regional and international…

International
8
International Bridges to Justice

In recognition of the fundamental principles of the universal declaration of human rights, international bridges to justice (ibj) is dedicated to protecting the basic legal rights of ordinary citizens in developing countries. specifically,…

Crime & Legal
9
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
10
Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Aajc Inc

The mission of asian americans advancing justice-aajc (aajc) is to advance civil and human rights for asian americans and to build and promote a fair and equitable society for all.

Civil Rights
11
American Israel Public Affairs Committee

Aipac is an american grassroots organization that works to strengthen the u.s.-israel partnership. our mission is to encourage and persuade the u.s. government to enact specific policies that create a strong, enduring, and mutually…

International
12
Global Justice Center

Global justice center is a legal human rights organization that uses international law to achieve gender equality and dismantle systems of oppression.

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Council of Jewish Women Incorporated; the most unlike its peers is League of Women Voters of Marin County. 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

23 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. 23 of the 35 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/23
Grantees still filing
11/23
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNION FOR REFORM JUDAISM: $70,000 · OtherUNION FOR REFORM JUDAISMJEWISH FEDERATION COUNCIL OF SAN DIEGO: $48,000 · OtherJEWISH FEDERATION COUNCIL OF SAN DIEGOJEWISH FEDERATION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY: $32,000 · OtherJEWISH FEDERATION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTYHEBREW UNION COLLEGE-JEWISH INSTITUTE OF RELIGION: $25,000 · OtherHEBREW UNION COLLEGE-JEWISH INSTITUTE OF RELIGIONUNION FR REFRMD JUDAISM D SAPERSTN: $25,000 · OtherUNION FR REFRMD JUDAISM D SAPERSTNMAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger: $25,000 · OtherMAZON A Jewish Response to HungerPUBLIC ART FUND INC: $25,000 · OtherPUBLIC ART FUND INCLAWYERS FOR CHILDREN: $15,000 · OtherRELIGIOUS ACTION CENTER: $15,000 · OtherSHARE OUR STRENGTH: $13,000 · Other+10 more: $68,500 · Other+10 moreTHE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC: $85,000 · Civil RightsTHE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTI…Southern Center for Human Rights: $31,000 · Civil RightsSouthern Center for Human…ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $25,000 · Civil RightsANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUENAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC: $16,000 · Civil RightsNAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDU…+1 more: $5,000 · Civil RightsNEW ISRAEL FUND: $74,000 · InternationalNEW ISRAEL FUNDAMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE INC: $25,000 · InternationalAMERICAN JEWISH …+3 more: $6,000 · International+3 moreAMERICA GIVES INC: $16,000 · PhilanthropyTHE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $16,000 · PhilanthropyCLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $25,000 · EnvironmentNATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN INCORPORATED: $12,000 · Community ImprovementLAWYERS FOR CHILDREN INC: $10,000 · Crime & Legal
Other$361,500Civil Rights$162,000International$105,000Philanthropy$32,000Environment$25,000Community Improvement$12,000Crime & Legal$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC: $85,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetNEW ISRAEL FUND: $74,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY: $32,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSouthern Center for Human Rights: $31,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetMAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger: $25,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetPUBLIC ART FUND INC: $25,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetCLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $25,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $25,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE INC: $25,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICA GIVES INC: $16,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC: $16,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $16,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSHARE OUR STRENGTH: $13,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN INCORPORATED: $12,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetLEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF MARIN COUNTY: $11,500 over 2y, 16% of budgetLAWYERS FOR CHILDREN INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSMILE TRAIN INC: $10,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCaringBridge: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPHYSICIANS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF SAN DIEGO: $1,000 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.

Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCA7.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Howard G & Samita B Jacobs Fndtn funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Howard G & Samita B Jacobs Fndtn. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    3report 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 35 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 Howard G & Samita B Jacobs Fndtn’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