Skip to content
The Judy & Bernard Briskin Family Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

The Judy & Bernard Briskin Family Foundation

The judy and bernard briskin family foundation aims to benefit programs and institutions which have an emphasis on health and medical needs and jewish organizations.

$-39689
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$4.9M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2024.

Health$31MReligion$4.0MEducation$3.7MPhilanthropy$3.0MHuman Services$200kHousing & Shelter$200kArts & Culture$100kCrime & Legal$25k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$4,900,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
City of Hope$4,900,000
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 (FY17–20, $400k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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%THE PEOPLE CONCERN: $100k → 14%OCEAN PARK COMMUNITY CENTER: $100k → 14%THE PEOPLE CONCERN: $100k → 14%OCEAN PARK COMMUNITY CENTER: $100k → 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.
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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$35M · 6 repeat orgs$150k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
3

Total granted

$35M
$150k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+63%
+112%

Still filing today

83%
67%

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
HealthHuman ServicesArts & 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

  • CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER
    2× · 2017–2018 · $2.9M · revenue +63%
  • VENICE FAMILY CLINIC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $1.7M · revenue +110%
  • TP
    THE PEOPLE CONCERN
    4× · 2017–2020 · $400k · revenue +696%

Funded once

  • WA
    WALLIS ANNENBERG CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTSgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $100k · revenue +71%
  • CS
    COMMUNITY SHUL OF MONTECITO AND SANTA BARBARA
    one grant, 2017 · $25k
  • OC
    OLIVE CREST ABUSED CHILDREN'S FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +112%
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
University of Southern California

The central mission of the university of southern california is the development of human beings and society as a whole through the cultivation and enrichment of the human mind and spirit. the principal means by which our mission is…

Education
2
The Jonsson Cancer Center Foundation

The jonsson cancer center foundation is the single most important vehicle for raising private funds for cancer research at ucla and plays a key role in advancing cancer treatments and care. please see schedule o for additional information.

—
3
Los Angeles Medical Center Foundation
Health
4
Pasadena Hospital Association Ltd

Huntington Health stands for community. We stand for compassion. But more than anything, Huntington stands for health. Providing world-class health care is our specialty, and it's what we've been doing for the San Gabriel Valley since…

Health
5
California Institute of Contemporary Art
—
6
University of California Irvine Foundation

The mission of the university of california, irvine foundation (uc irvine foundation) is to raise and manage private funds to support uc irvine's broader mission of excellence in teaching, research and public service. to this end, the uc…

Education
7
Pediatric and Family Medical Center Dba Eisner Health

Eisner health is a quality-focused, federally qualified nonprofit community health center dedicated to improving the physical, social, and emotional well-being of people in the communities we serve, regardless of income.

Health
8
California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy

To harness the power of the human immune system and advanced computing technologies to create and translate scientific discoveries into next generation vaccines and therapies for prevention, control and cure of chronic diseases, enabling…

Health
9
Sutter Bay Hospitals

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
10
Western University of Health Sciences

To produce, in a humanistic tradition, health care professionals and biomedical knowledge that will enhance and extend the quality of life in our communities.

—
11
Doheny Eye Institute

To further the conservation, improvement and restoration of human eyesight" (mrs. doheny - 1947).

—
12
South Central Family Health Center

To improve the quality of life for the diverse communities we serve providing affordable and comprehensive healthcare and education in a welcoming multi-cultural environment.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles; the most unlike its peers is Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. 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

10 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. 10 of the 12 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
9/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CITY OF HOPE: $26,100,000 · HealthCITY OF HOPECEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER: $2,850,000 · HealthCEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTERVENICE FAMILY CLINIC: $1,695,541 · HealthVENICE FAMILY CLINIC+1 more: $180,000 · HealthTEMPLE ISRAEL OF HOLLYWOOD: $4,000,000 · OtherTEMPLE ISR…+2 more: $50,000 · OtherUCLA FOUNDATION: $3,700,000 · EducationUCLA FOUN…JEWISH FEDERATION COUNCIL OF GREATER LA: $1,990,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF LOS ANGELES: $975,000 · PhilanthropyTHE PEOPLE CONCERN: $400,000 · Human ServicesWALLIS ANNENBERG CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS: $100,000 · Arts & Culture
Health$30,825,541Other$4,050,000Education$3,700,000Philanthropy$2,965,000Human Services$400,000Arts & Culture$100,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCITY OF HOPE: $26,100,000 over 8y, 1.6% of budgetUCLA FOUNDATION: $3,700,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetCEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER: $2,850,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION COUNCIL OF GREATER LA: $1,990,000 over 5y, 2.1% of budgetVENICE FAMILY CLINIC: $1,695,541 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF LOS ANGELES: $975,000 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetTHE PEOPLE CONCERN: $400,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetWOMEN'S GUILD CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER: $180,000 over 3y, 8.1% of budgetWALLIS ANNENBERG CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS: $100,000 over 1y, 1.3% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Jewish Community Foun…
Jewish Community Foundation of Los AngelesCA13.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles

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 Judy & Bernard Briskin Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Judy & Bernard Briskin Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Judy & Bernard Briskin Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Judy & Bernard Briskin Family Foundation 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 12 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 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 Judy & Bernard Briskin 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