Skip to content
The James and Nancy Wolf Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The James and Nancy Wolf Family Foundation

Its FY2026 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$127k
Granted FY2026still arriving
9
Grants FY2026still arriving
4
States reached
$60k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$595kHuman Services$364kPhilanthropy$229kHousing & Shelter$50kRecreation & Sports$43kPublic Safety & Disaster$25kHealth$4kFood & Nutrition$1kOther$0
02FY2026 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2026

  • Under $10k6 grants · $6k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $61k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $60k
$500
Median grant
4
States reached
$2.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$60,000
JEWISH FEDERATION OF PITTSBURGH$35,000
SHADY SIDE ACADEMY$26,000
UNITED JEWISH FEDERATION OF UTAH$5,000
SIBLEY FOUNDATION$500
ALZHEIMER'S ASSOCIATION$250
JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES$250
LUNG CANCER FOUNDATION OF AMERICA$250
HOMELESS CHILDREN FUND$100
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 (FY23–25, $37k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF STATEN ISLAND: $1k → 11%HOMELESS CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $500 → 12%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF OF GREATER PITTSBURGH: $25k → 11%FOX FAMILIES CARE: $10k → 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.
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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.3M · 7 repeat orgs$78k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +45% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2026, 3 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
12

Total granted

$1.3M
$77k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+45%
0%

Still filing today

29%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
Human ServicesEducationRecreation & SportsHealthArts & CultureFood & NutritionOther
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

  • SS
    SHADY SIDE ACADEMY
    10× · 2017–2026 · $596k · revenue +45%
  • JC
    JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER
    6× · 2017–2022 · $329k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    3× · 2024–2026 · $165k

Funded once

  • YM
    YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN'S HEBREW ASSOCIATION AND IRENE KAUFMANN CENT
    one grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue +11%
  • WASHINGTON UNIVERSITYgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue +44%
  • FF
    Fox Families Care
    one grant, 2025 · $10k · 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
Jewish Community Centers of Greater Boston

To advance the aspirations of families and individuals to enrich their lives, bodies and spirits, by providing the best in contemporary programs and experiences, informed by jewish values for today's jews and the people in their lives.

Human Services
2
Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania

The trustees of the university of pennsylvania (the "university") sees itself as having a public service mission. in such regard, the university aims to provide a rich and diverse educational environment for its students; to pioneer…

Education
3
Bender Jcc of Greater Washington

The bender jcc embraces and welcomes the diversity of our community and encourages everyone to seek meaning and fulfillment by participating in our rich programming inspired by our jewish heritage. we open our doors to everyone, including…

Human Services
4
Philadelphia Jewish Film and Media

Philadelphia jewish film and media (pjfm) creates connection and community through jewish cinema and digital storytelling. pjfm welcomes everyone to engage with jewish culture and values through its educational and entertaining year-round…

Human Services
5
Tucson Jewish Community Center Inc

The mission of the tucson jewish community center (tucson j) is to cultivate and enrich jewish identity, ensure jewish continuity, foster wellness, and broaden communal harmony. the vision is to strive to be an outstanding jewish community…

Human Services
6
Upmc Pinnacle Hospitals

Upmc pinnacle hospitals mission as a charitable organization is dedicatied to maintaining and improving the health and quality of life for all persons of the central pennsylvania area.

Health
7
Jewish Community Center of Greater Rochester Inc

The louis s. wolk jcc of greater rochester is deeply rooted in and committed to celebrating jewish traditions and values. we welcome the community at large to join together for exceptional events and activities that establish lifelong…

Human Services
8
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.

Health
9
University of Saint Joseph

The university provides a rigorous liberal arts and professional education for a diverse student population. (see schedule o for the organization's mission.)

Education
10
Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh Foundation

Children's hospital of pittsburgh foundation is the sole fundraising arm of upmc children's hospital of pittsburgh.the foundation exists to provide financial support for the hospital's mission of improving the health and well-being of…

Health
11
Phipps Conservatory and Botanical Gardens Inc

Phipps' mission is to inspire and educate all with the beauty and importance of plants, to advance sustainability and promote human and environmental well-being through action and research, and to celebrate its historic glasshouse.

Environment
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Park City Community Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Breakthrough Bike Challenge. 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

16 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 16 of the 27 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)
16/16
Grantees still filing
9/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $328,500 · OtherJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERIndividual grant recipient: $165,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientJEWISH FEDERATION OF PITTSBURGH: $118,355 · OtherJEWISH FEDERATION OF PITTSBURGH+8 more: $23,100 · OtherSHADY SIDE ACADEMY: $595,500 · EducationSHADY SIDE ACADEMYWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $25,000 · EducationJEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER PITTSBURGH: $150,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDER…PARK CITY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $10,000 · PhilanthropyPARK CITY CO…+2 more: $5,500 · PhilanthropyNorthwestern University: $42,000 · Recreation & Sports+1 more: $1,000 · Recreation & SportsYOUNG MEN AND WOMEN'S HEBREW ASSOCIATION AND IRENE KAUFMANN CENT: $25,000 · Human ServicesFox Families Care: $10,000 · Human ServicesJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF SI INC: $1,250 · Human Services+1 more: $500 · Human ServicesPeople's Health Clicnic: $1,000 · HealthLUNG CANCER FOUNDATION OF AMERICA: $250 · HealthGREATER PITTSBURGH COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $1,000 · Food & NutritionMARTHA'S VINEYARD MUSEUM INC: $250 · Arts & Culture
Other$634,955Education$620,500Philanthropy$165,500Recreation & Sports$43,000Human Services$36,750Health$1,250Food & Nutrition$1,000Arts & Culture$250

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 budgetSHADY SIDE ACADEMY: $595,500 over 10y, 0.3% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER PITTSBURGH: $150,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetNorthwestern University: $42,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetYOUNG MEN AND WOMEN'S HEBREW ASSOCIATION AND IRENE KAUFMANN CENT: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFox Families Care: $10,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetPARK CITY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF SI INC: $1,250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPeople's Health Clicnic: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER PITTSBURGH COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBREAKTHROUGH BIKE CHALLENGE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHOMELESS CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWasatch Community Foundation: $500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMARTHA'S VINEYARD MUSEUM INC: $250 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.

National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Philanthropic TrustPA9.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 James and Nancy Wolf Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The James and Nancy Wolf Family 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%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    5report 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 27 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on James and Nancy Wolf Family’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