Skip to content
The Paul & Annetta Himmelfarb Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

The Paul & Annetta Himmelfarb 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.

$298k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$120k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0186% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Human Services$1.1MEducation$295kHealth$225kPhilanthropy$149kPublic Benefit$96kReligion$38kArts & Culture$28kInternational$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $23k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $104k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $172k
$20,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$6.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JEWISH SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCY$120,000
Individual grant recipient$52,129
MILTON GOTTESMAN JEWISH DAY SCHOOL$28,000
COMPASS$25,000
B'NAI ISRAEL CONGREGATION$20,000
HEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION OF GREATER WASHINGTON$15,500
THE JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER WASHINGTON$15,000
JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA$7,500
UJA FEDERATION OF NEW YORK$7,500
BENDER JCC OF GREATHER WASHINGTON$7,500
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 (FY24–25, $18k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%BENDER JCC OF GREATHER WASHINGTON: $10k → 8%BENDER JCC OF GREATHER WASHINGTON: $8k → 8%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.2M · 10 repeat orgs$20k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
1

Total granted

$2.2M
$20k

Still filing today

70%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesEducationPublic BenefitInternationalPhilanthropyArts & 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

  • MG
    MILTON GOTTESMAN JEWISH DAY SCHOOL OF THE NATION'S CAPITAL
    9× · 2017–2025 · $295k · revenue +129%
  • CI
    COMPASS INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $225k · revenue +179%
  • HF
    Hebrew Free Loan Association of DC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $96k · revenue +206%

Funded once

  • BN
    B NAI ISRAEL CONGREGATION
    one grant, 2025 · $20k
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
Delegation of Jewish American Students (Dojas)
—
2
Jewish Federation of Greater Clifton-Passaic
—
3
The Jerusalem Connection
—
4
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
5
National Council of Jewish Women Inc Jersey Hills Section
—
6
Eastern European Jewish Heritage Foundation
Philanthropy
7
Jewish Federation of Greater Atlanta Inc

The jewish federation of greater atlanta cares for, connects and strengthens our jewish community throughout greater atlanta, israel and the world.

Philanthropy
8
University of Judaism Foundation
—
9
J Leaders

Our vision is to develop ethical, impactful Jewish young adult leaders to ensure a vibrant Jewish community and make the world a better place. Our mission is to empower and engage Jewish young adults through leadership development and…

Youth Development
10
Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle

The federation leads a strong jewish puget sound by serving as a community voice, strengthening connections to israel and world jewry, and making investments in jewish life, for today and the next generation.

Philanthropy
11
Foundation for Conservative Judiasm of South Florida
—
12
Dorot Foundation
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Jewish Appeal-Federation of Jewish Philanthropies of New York Inc; the most unlike its peers is Compass 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

9 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. 9 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
8/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JEWISH SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCY: $1,080,000 · OtherJEWISH SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCYIndividual grant recipient: $369,396 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+2 more: $35,000 · OtherMILTON GOTTESMAN JEWISH DAY SCHOOL OF THE NATION'S CAPITAL: $295,000 · EducationMILTON GOTTESM…COMPASS INC: $225,000 · Human ServicesCOMPASS INCBENDER JCC OF GREATER WASHINGTON: $17,500 · Human ServicesBENDER JCC …THE JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER WASHINGTON INC: $69,000 · PhilanthropyTHE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $42,500 · PhilanthropyUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC: $37,500 · PhilanthropyHebrew Free Loan Association of DC: $95,500 · Public BenefitLillian and Albert Small Capital Jewish Museum: $28,000 · Arts & CultureIMPACTISRAEL INC: $10,000 · International
Other$1,484,396Education$295,000Human Services$242,500Philanthropy$149,000Public Benefit$95,500Arts & Culture$28,000International$10,000

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 budgetMILTON GOTTESMAN JEWISH DAY SCHOOL OF THE NATION'S CAPITAL: $295,000 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetCOMPASS INC: $225,000 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetHebrew Free Loan Association of DC: $95,500 over 6y, 8.4% of budgetTHE JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER WASHINGTON INC: $69,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $42,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC: $37,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetLillian and Albert Small Capital Jewish Museum: $28,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetBENDER JCC OF GREATER WASHINGTON: $17,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetIMPACTISRAEL INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% 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 MILTON GOTTESMAN JEWISH DAY SCHOOL OF THE NATION'S CAPITAL ↗
  • Who funds COMPASS INC ↗
  • Who funds Hebrew Free Loan Association of DC ↗
  • Who funds THE JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER WASHINGTON INC ↗
  • Who funds THE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC ↗
  • Who funds Lillian and Albert Small Capital Jewish Museum ↗
  • Who funds BENDER JCC OF GREATER WASHINGTON ↗
  • Who funds IMPACTISRAEL INC ↗

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.

American Endowment Fo…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
American Endowment FoundationOH10.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Paul & Annetta Himmelfarb Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Paul & Annetta Himmelfarb Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Bender Jcc of Greater Washington: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
3report 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to The Paul & Annetta Himmelfarb Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to The Paul & Annetta Himmelfarb Foundation Inc 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 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 Paul & Annetta Himmelfarb’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