How much does The Praw Foundation give?

The Praw Foundation reported 35 grants totaling $55,328 in its FY2025 IRS filing. It funded between 14 and 46 organizations a year over FY2020 to FY2024.

What does The Praw Foundation fund?

By grant dollars over FY2020 to FY2025, its largest causes are Religion (71%), Education (7%), Health (6%).

Who are The Praw Foundation's largest grantees?

By total granted over FY2020 to FY2025: Adas Torah ($93k), Chai Lifeline Inc ($24k), HaOhr Hamufatz Inc ($15k).

Does The Praw Foundation fund new organizations?

In FY2024, 41% of the organizations it funded were first-time grantees.

Does The Praw Foundation accept unsolicited applications?

Its most recent filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and does not take unsolicited requests. Check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

Which funders back the same organizations as The Praw Foundation?

Its strongest co-funders, measured against what their size predicts, include Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles, Goldner Family Foundation Inc, The Elishis Family Foundation.

Where is The Praw Foundation based?

The Praw Foundation is based in FL.

The Praw Foundation

The Praw Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Praw Foundation

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.

$55k

Granted FY2025still arriving

Grants FY2025still arriving

States reached

$11k

Largest

01What it funds

0190% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Religion$291kEducation$28kHealth$23kCommunity Improvement$11kRecreation & Sports$10kInternational$7kHuman Services$6kPhilanthropy$5kOther$0

02FY2025 · 35 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

Under $10k34 grants · $44k
$10k–50k1 grant · $11k

$1,000

Median grant

States reached

$297k

Total assets

Largest grants
Recipient	Amount
ADAS TORAH	$10,900
Individual grant recipient	$7,050
CHAI LIFELINE	$5,000
MIKVEH SOCIETY OF LA	$4,500
HAOR HAMAFUTZ	$3,600
TOMCHEI SHABBOS	$3,170
ZAKA TEL AVIV	$2,000
YAD MENACHEM	$1,500
CHABAD ISRAEL CENTER	$1,000
TEACHERS ON FIRE	$1,000
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MIGDAL TORAH	$1,000
FRIENDS OF JHUB LA	$1,000
Individual grant recipient	$1,000
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM	$1,000
CHESSED V'RACHAMIM (SHAI GRAUCHER)	$1,000

02The need

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 (FY21–24, $4k) 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.

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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.

$369k · 42 repeat orgs$98k to everyone else

42 repeat relationships: 27 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$369k

$93k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+3%

+5%

Still filing today

33%

21%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

ReligionInternationalHealthPhilanthropyHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentOther

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

CL
CHAI LIFELINE INC
5× · 2020–2025 · $24k · revenue +43%
ZT
Zaka Tel-Aviv Inc
3× · 2023–2025 · $6k · revenue +3%
NG
NER GAVRIEL FUND INC
2× · 2022–2023 · $4k · revenue +111%

Funded once

IG
Individual grant recipient
one grant, 2021 · $10k
IG
Individual grant recipient
one grant, 2021 · $10k
IG
Individual grant recipient
one grant, 2020 · $9k

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.

Zichron Moshe Elihu Tzedoka Fund

Philanthropy

Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation

Philanthropy

Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel

Philanthropy

Zichron Avrohom Yosef

Philanthropy

Sherit Isroel

—

Zichroin Rabbeini Meshilem Feiish Ztl Foundation

—

Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation

Philanthropy

Zicron Eliyahu Inc

—

Tal Hashamayim Foundation

Religion

The Keren Rachaim Fund

—

The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation

—

Tzemach Yifroch Foundation

—

How this is measured

The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is One Israel Fund Ltd; the most unlike its peers is TorahAnytimeCom 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

28 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. 28 of the 107 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.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

28/28

Grantees still filing

15/28

Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Other$389,674Health$24,852Community Improvement$14,600Religion$14,420Philanthropy$9,720International$9,496Human Services$4,080Youth Development$460

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

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.

Jewish Community Foundation of Los AngelesCA31.6× affinity14 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Goldner Family Foundation Inc · The Elishis Family Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · The Ojc Fund · Marbeh Shalom Foundation Inc · The Rav-Noy Family Foundation Inc · Alyad Foundation Inc · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · The Siegel Family Charitable Foundation · Chavi F Hertz Foundation Inc · Todd a and Raphaela Stern Family 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 Praw Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Praw Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

3get 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 · 0–5%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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.

Play a game based on Praw’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