Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Krauss Charitable Foundation

Its FY2021 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$164k
Granted FY2021
24
Grants FY2021
9
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2021.

Health$417kPhilanthropy$149kEducation$119kScience & Tech$105kRecreation & Sports$95kAnimals$47kFood & Nutrition$46kInternational$35kOther$0
02FY2021 · 24 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2021

  • Under $10k19 grants · $59k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $55k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$4,000
Median grant
9
States reached
$7.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BEAR GIVERS$50,000
MULTIPLE MYELOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATIO$20,000
CIDNY$15,000
FRIENDS OF LAKET ISRAEL$10,000
MAZON$10,000
PROGENIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION$8,000
ANIMAL RESCUE FUND$6,000
NY TIMES NEEDIEST CASES$5,000
HIAS$5,000
NC STATE UNIVERSITY$5,000
STANLEY ISAACS NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER$5,000
WOODSIDE PORTOLA VALLEY FIRE PROTEC$4,000
WOODSIDE PRIORY SCHOOL$3,000
RONALD MACDONALD HOUSE$3,000
MUSIC FOR AUTISM$2,500
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 (FY17–21, $16k) land where the poverty rate runs at 23%, 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%CAMP KESEM: $5k → 14%SIENA HOUSE: $3k → 28%SIENA HOUSE: $2k → 28%SIENA HOUSE: $2k → 28%SIENA HOUSE: $2k → 28%SIENA HOUSE: $2k → 28%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
NY
MA
NJ
CT
CA
MD
KS
AR
NC
DC
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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 33 repeat orgs$90k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +90% since the first grant, against +9% for those funded once.

33 repeat relationships: 18 still active in FY2021, 15 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

33
7

Total granted

$1.1M
$60k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+90%
+9%

Still filing today

45%
29%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21
HealthHuman ServicesFood & NutritionInternationalPublic Safety & DisasterRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • BG
    BEAR GIVERS INC
    2× · 2019–2021 · $250k · revenue +112% · 42% of their budget
  • CL
    CHAI LIFELINE INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $40k · revenue +58%
  • PR
    PROGERIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC
    5× · 2017–2021 · $35k · revenue +108%

Funded once

  • UD
    UC DAVIS DARROWBY ANGEL FUND
    one grant, 2017 · $30k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $15k
  • TF
    The Food Project Inc
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue -2%
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
Food Allergy Science Initiative Inc

To accelerate the development of breakthrough discoveries that will transform the lives of people living with food allergies.

—
2
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
3
Partners in Food Solutions

Improve the food value chain in developing countries by mobilizing corporate volunteers to share knowledge and expertise with small and growing food processors.

International
4
Samuel Waxman Cancer Research Foundation

The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…

—
5
International Food Information Council

To effectively communicate science based information on food safety, nutrition, and health for the public good.

Arts & Culture
6
Hunger Solutions New York Inc

We strive to maximize participation in, and support for, federally funded nutrition assistance programs including supplemental nutrition assistance program (snap), the school breakfast program and national school lunch program, the summer…

Food & Nutrition
7
Gavi Alliance

To save lives and protect people's health by increasing equitable and sustainable use of vaccines.

International
8
Fajr Scientific

To provide multi-specialty surgical care, humanitarian aid and educational support to people in low- and middle-income countries.

Science & Tech
9
Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition

The mission of the global alliance for improved nutrition (gain) is to improve the consumption of healthier diets for all, especially the most vulnerable, by improving the availability, affordability, desirability, and sustainability of…

Food & Nutrition
10
Allosource

Inspired by the gift of donation from our communities, allosource responsibly provides innovative cellular and tissue allografts to advance patient healing.

Health
11
Food Forward Inc

Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.

Food & Nutrition
12
Paypal Charitable Giving Fund

Our vision is to reimagine everyday giving to help charities. our mission is to enable the world's leading online platforms to create opportunities for everyday charitable giving. in doing so, we ensure our programs are trustworthy,…

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wounded Warrior Project Inc; the most unlike its peers is Siena House Inc. 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

19 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. 19 of the 46 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
14/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UC REGENTS DARROWBY ANGEL FUND: $105,000 · OtherUC REGENTS DARROWBY ANGEL FUNDSTANFORD UNIVERSITY RESEARCH M LIEDTHE: $105,000 · OtherSTANFORD UNIVERSITY RESEARCH M LIEDTHEDAVIS FOUNDATION INC: $90,000 · OtherDAVIS FOUNDATION INCNETHERLAND AMERICA FOUNDATION - FOR RCO FUND: $65,000 · OtherNETHERLAND AMERICA FOUNDATION - FOR RCO FUNDCIDNY: $54,000 · OtherCIDNYUC DAVIS DARROWBY ANGEL FUND: $30,000 · OtherANIMAL RESCUE FUND: $27,000 · Other+25 more: $216,000 · Other+25 moreBEAR GIVERS INC: $250,000 · HealthBEAR GIVERS INCTHE MULTIPLE MYELOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $79,000 · HealthTHE MULTIPLE MYELOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION…CHAI LIFELINE INC: $40,000 · HealthCHAI LIFELINE INCPROGERIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $35,000 · HealthPROGERIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC+1 more: $10,000 · HealthSIENA HOUSE INC: $11,000 · Human ServicesCamp Kesem National: $5,000 · Human ServicesWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $1,800 · Human ServicesHIAS INC: $10,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $5,000 · InternationalPROJECT BREAD-THE WALK FOR HUNGER INC: $8,000 · Food & NutritionThe Food Project Inc: $5,000 · Food & NutritionWOODSIDE-PORTOLA VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION FOUNDATION INC: $12,000 · Public Safety & DisasterFRESH AIR FUND: $5,000 · Recreation & Sports
Other$692,000Health$414,000Human Services$17,800International$15,000Food & Nutrition$13,000Public Safety & Disaster$12,000Recreation & Sports$5,000

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 budgetBEAR GIVERS INC: $250,000 over 2y, 42% of budgetTHE MULTIPLE MYELOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $79,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $40,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetPROGERIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $35,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetMAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger: $15,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWOODSIDE-PORTOLA VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION FOUNDATION INC: $12,000 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetSIENA HOUSE INC: $11,000 over 5y, 1.4% of budgetSIGHTSAVERS INC: $10,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetSMILE TRAIN INC: $10,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetHIAS INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPROJECT BREAD-THE WALK FOR HUNGER INC: $8,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetThe Food Project Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSTANLEY M ISAACS NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $5,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetFRESH AIR FUND: $5,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetCamp Kesem National: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPENINSULA OPEN SPACE TRUST: $5,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetMUSIC FOR AUTISM: $2,500 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $1,800 over 4y, 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.

  • Who funds BEAR GIVERS INC ↗
  • Who funds THE MULTIPLE MYELOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗
  • Who funds PROGERIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds MAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger ↗
  • Who funds WOODSIDE-PORTOLA VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds SIENA HOUSE INC ↗
  • Who funds SIGHTSAVERS INC ↗
  • Who funds SMILE TRAIN INC ↗
  • Who funds HIAS INC ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT BREAD-THE WALK FOR HUNGER INC ↗
  • Who funds The Food Project Inc ↗
  • Who funds STANLEY M ISAACS NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds FRESH AIR FUND ↗
  • Who funds Camp Kesem National ↗
  • Who funds PENINSULA OPEN SPACE TRUST ↗

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 Philanthropic TrustPA9.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Krauss Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Krauss Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 88%
  • Hias Inc: 88% of income from government
  • Wounded Warrior Project Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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 46 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Krauss’ filings →

More from the funding graph