· Private foundation
The Kalt Family Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k15 grants · $29k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $51k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $68k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO | $67,500 |
| SANTA BARBARA FOOD BANK | $25,000 |
| NORTHSHORE UNIVERSITY | $15,750 |
| CONGREGATION BNAI BRITH | $10,495 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $5,516 |
| AFISCD | $5,000 |
| PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS | $2,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,500 |
| LAKEVIEW PANTRY | $2,500 |
| MISSION SCHOLARS | $2,500 |
| DIRECT RELIEF | $2,000 |
| SANTA BARBARA INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL | $1,084 |
| SANTA BARBARA HIGH SCHOOL FOUNDATION | $1,030 |
| KESHET | $1,000 |
| NYC MARATHON - NEW YORK ROAD RUNNERS | $1,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $60k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 48% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +34% since the first grant, against +8% for the ones you funded once.
45 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 37 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- JUJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO9× · 2017–2025 · $464k · revenue +13%
- UOUniversity of Michigan3× · 2017–2019 · $160k · revenue +202% · 38% of their budget
- DUDEPAUL UNIVERSITY3× · 2020–2023 · $100k · revenue +7%
Funded once
- NSNORTH SHORE FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · $30k
- HFHEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCOgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue +69%
- UWUNITED WAY OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO INCone grant, 2020 · $21k · revenue -50%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
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.
The organization's mission is to educate students for creative occupations in diverse fields of arts and media.
Ai4all's mission is to ensure that the next generation of ai leaders reflects humanity. ai4all is transforming the pipeline of ai practitioners who will shape ai for the benefit of humanity.
Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.
The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…
The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…
The chicago public education fund (the fund) is a nonprofit organization that improves public schools in chicago by investing in the talented educators who lead them.
Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…
Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes. nyu's primary missions are education, research and scholarship, and patient care.
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…
Biu produces students who excel in the sciences, humanities, law, engineering, business & the arts.
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Colorado Gives Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Dream Hustle Code. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 38 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
73 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 73 of the 126 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds SCRIPTED INC DBA CODE NATION ↗
- Who funds JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds University of Michigan ↗
- Who funds DEPAUL UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds University of Chicago ↗
- Who funds GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY ↗
- Who funds NOURISHING HOPE ↗
- Who funds JARC ↗
- Who funds DARE2TRI PARATRIATHLON CLUB ↗
- Who funds HEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO INC ↗
- Who funds GREENHOUSE SCHOLARS ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF GIVAT HAVIVA ↗
- Who funds Foodbank of Santa Barbara County Inc ↗
- Who funds TAZZY ANIMAL RESCUE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds NAMM Foundation A Not-For-Profit Corporation ↗
- Who funds CRADLES TO CRAYONS INC ↗
- Who funds HOPE CHICAGO INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY INC ↗
- Who funds BIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: The Chicago Community Trust · Dancing Tides Foundation Inc · Mosher Foundation · Circle of Service Foundation · Santa Barbara Foundation · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · Brittingham Family Foundation · Manitou Fund · United Jewish Foundation · Arie and Ida Crown Memorial · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of San Diego
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization The Kalt Family Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- City Year Inc — 11% of income from government
- Cradles to Crayons Inc — 2% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.