Skip to content
The Kevah and Michele Konner Family Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

The Kevah and Michele Konner Family Foundation Inc

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.

$14k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$4k
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$51kInternational$15kEducation$12kPhilanthropy$12kAnimals$6kRecreation & Sports$4kEnvironment$2kHousing & Shelter$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$354k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
METRO SQUASH NFP$4,000
HEARTS & BONES ANIMAL RESCUE$3,000
CHICAGO FURNITURE BANK INC$2,000
GRID ALTERNATIVES$2,000
ONE TAIL AT A TIME NFP$1,500
PAWS CHICAGO$1,500
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 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%CHICAGO FURNITURE BANK INC: $2k → 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.

59%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$62k · 3 repeat orgs$43k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +87% since the first grant, against +61% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
4

Total granted

$62k
$29k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+87%
+61%

Still filing today

67%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $14k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthAnimalsRecreation & SportsInternationalPhilanthropyHuman ServicesOther
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

  • NL
    NYU LANGONE MEDICAL CENTER
    4× · 2017–2022 · $35k
  • TN
    The New York and Presbyterian Hospital
    3× · 2017–2020 · $15k · revenue +87%
  • HS
    HACKLEY SCHOOL
    2× · 2021–2022 · $12k · revenue +2%

Funded once

  • FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES
    one grant, 2024 · $15k · revenue 0%
  • JU
    JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGOgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $12k · revenue +32%
  • CS
    City Squash Incgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue +61%
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 Federation of Metropolitan Chicago

Federation amplifies our collective strength to make the world a better place for everyone. we assist people in need, impact chicagoans of all faiths; support israel and the jewish people worldwide; respond swiftly to crises; cultivate…

Philanthropy
2
The New York Gracie Square Hospital Inc

Our mission is to provide the highest-quality, state-of-the-art mental health and chemical dependency treatment in a warm, healing environment. our caring, compassionate team prepares our patients to return to their families and…

Health
3
Northwestern Memorial HealthCare Group

Northwestern memorial healthcare is an integrated healthcare system, consisting of multiple hospitals (including northwestern memorial hospital, an academic medical center) and networks of physicians and healthcare professionals, where the…

Health
4
Newyork-Presbyterianqueens

To be the premier healthcare institution serving our greater community by providing excellence in clinical care and patient safety, education, clinical research, and service.

Health
5
New York University

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.

Education
6
Jewish Family Services of Greenwich

Jewish family services of greenwich (jfs) is a nonprofit social service agency dedicated to strengthening individuals and families in fairfield and new london counties. jfs provides behavioral health counseling, food security programs,…

—
7
The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

The aspca's mission, as stated by founder henry bergh in 1866, is "to provide effective means for the prevention of cruelty to animals throughout the united states." the aspca was founded on the belief that animals are entitled to kind and…

Animals
8
Parker Jewish Institute for Health Care and Rehabilitation

To provide with compassion and dedication superior quality health care and rehabilitation for adults and to directly or indirectly coordinate arrangements and provision for comprehensive health care and social support services to frail…

Health
9
North Shore University Hospital

North shore university hospital is part of northwell health ("northwell"), which strives to improve the health of the communities it serves and is committed to providing the highest quality clinical care; educating the current and future…

Health
10
Julia Dyckman Andrus Memorial Inc

Through our proven care models, innovative programs, professional training, influential research and determined advocacy, andrus aims to be a national leader in shaping policies and practices that prevent and overcome the effect of…

Unclassified
11
University of Chicago Medical Center

Our mission at the university of chicago medicine is to provide superior health care through rigorous research, innovative education, and comprehensive care and healing. in partnership with our colleagues, we pursue life-changing…

Health
12
Rush University Medical Center

The mission of Rush is to improve the health of the individuals and diverse communities we serve through the integration of outstanding patient care, education, research and community partnerships.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Paws Chicago; the most unlike its peers is Hearts & Bones Animal Rescue. 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

11 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. 11 of the 13 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NYU LANGONE MEDICAL CENTER: $35,000 · OtherNYU LANGONE MEDICAL CENTERGRID ALTERNATIVES: $2,000 · OtherGRID ALTERNATIVESThe New York and Presbyterian Hospital: $15,000 · HealthThe New York and Presbyterian …HACKLEY SCHOOL: $12,000 · HealthHACKLEY SCHOOLNORTHERN WESTCHESTER HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION: $1,000 · HealthFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $15,000 · InternationalFRIENDS OF THE I…JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $12,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH UNITE…HEARTS & BONES ANIMAL RESCUE: $3,000 · AnimalsONE TAIL AT A TIME NFP: $1,500 · AnimalsPAWS CHICAGO: $1,500 · AnimalsMETROSQUASH NFP: $4,000 · Recreation & SportsCity Squash Inc: $1,000 · Recreation & SportsCHICAGO FURNITURE BANK: $2,000 · Human Services
Other$37,000Health$28,000International$15,000Philanthropy$12,000Animals$6,000Recreation & Sports$5,000Human Services$2,000

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 budgetThe New York and Presbyterian Hospital: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $12,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHACKLEY SCHOOL: $12,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMETROSQUASH NFP: $4,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCHICAGO FURNITURE BANK: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCity Squash Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNORTHERN WESTCHESTER HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION: $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.

Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Charities Aid Foundat…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Jpmorgan Chase FoundationNY12× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Kevah and Michele Konner Family Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Kevah and Michele Konner Family Foundation Inc. 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%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 13 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 Kevah and Michele Konner 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