Skip to content
The Wilfred J Minkus Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

The Wilfred J Minkus Charitable Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$98k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Religion$157kEducation$149kInternational$111kRecreation & Sports$72kHuman Services$27kArts & Culture$10kPublic Safety & Disaster$8kEnvironment$7kOther$0
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k8 grants · $38k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $60k
$8,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MORIAH CONGREGATION$15,000
GABRIEL PROJECT MUMBAI$15,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
CAMP RAMAH IN WISCONSIN$8,000
SOLOMON SCHECHTER DAY SCHOOL$8,000
ROCHELLE ZELL JEWISH HIGH SCHOOL$5,000
CHICAGO JEWISH DAY SCHOOL$5,000
HINDA INSTITUTE$3,000
SVIVAH$3,000
SACRED SPACES$3,000
LIBENU$3,000
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 (FY18–25, $27k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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%LIBENU: $3k → 14%LIBENU: $3k → 14%LIBENU: $3k → 14%LIBENU: $2k → 14%JEWISH CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES: $14k → 14%LIBENU: $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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$606k · 17 repeat orgs$85k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +65% since the first grant, against +1% for those funded once.

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
9

Total granted

$606k
$64k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+65%
+1%

Still filing today

35%
89%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $21k 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
InternationalEducationHuman ServicesReligionArts & CulturePublic Safety & DisasterOther
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

  • GP
    Gabriel Project Mumbai
    9× · 2017–2025 · $95k · revenue +65%
  • RZ
    ROCHELLE ZELL JEWISH HIGH SCHOOL
    8× · 2018–2025 · $58k · revenue +7%
  • CJ
    CHICAGO JEWISH DAY SCHOOL
    7× · 2018–2025 · $38k · revenue +2%

Funded once

  • JC
    Jewish Child and Family Services
    one grant, 2021 · $14k · revenue +6%
  • FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -33%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -45%
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
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
2
Sherit Isroel
—
3
Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary

To prepare students for the rabbinate and to issue the traditional certificate of ordination in connection therewith. the seminary is authorized to confer the degree of master of hebrew literature (m.h.l.), doctor of hebrew literature…

Education
4
Aishel Hatzedek
International
5
University of Judaism Foundation
—
6
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
7
Vaad Hapula Inc

Support jewry in Israel

Religion
8
Greater Miami Hillel Foundation Inc

The mission of the organization is to enrich the lives of jewish undergraduate and graduate students so that they may enrich the jewish people and the world.

—
9
Eastern European Jewish Heritage Foundation
Philanthropy
10
Boundless Israel Inc

The organization is a think-action tank partnering with community leaders to revitalize israel education and take bold collective action to combat jew-hatred.

Education
11
Yad Laniyim
Philanthropy
12
National Council of Jewish Women Inc Jersey Hills Section
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hazon Inc; the most unlike its peers is No Shame On U 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

16 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. 16 of the 29 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)
16/16
Grantees still filing
10/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

OROT: $91,000 · OtherOROTCAMP RAMAH: $64,000 · OtherCAMP RAMAHTHE ARK: $58,000 · OtherTHE ARKSOLOMON SCHECTER DAY SCHOOL: $52,500 · OtherSOLOMON SCHECTER DAY SCHOOLIndividual grant recipient: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $20,000 · OtherAMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE: $16,000 · OtherSOLOMON SCHECHTER DAY SCHOOL: $16,000 · OtherCAMP RAMAH IN WISCONSIN INC: $16,000 · OtherMORIAH CONGREGATION: $15,000 · Other+4 more: $19,000 · OtherGabriel Project Mumbai: $95,000 · InternationalGabriel Project Mu…FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $10,000 · InternationalFRIENDS OF THE ISR…ISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE: $5,000 · InternationalROCHELLE ZELL JEWISH HIGH SCHOOL: $57,500 · EducationROCHELLE ZELL JE…CHICAGO JEWISH DAY SCHOOL: $38,000 · EducationCHICAGO JEWISH D…+1 more: $3,000 · EducationJewish Child and Family Services: $14,000 · Human ServicesLIBENU: $13,000 · Human ServicesFOOTSTEPS INC: $3,000 · Human ServicesSVIVAH INC: $11,000 · ReligionTHE HINDA INSTITUTE: $3,000 · ReligionSACRED SPACES: $3,000 · ReligionFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $10,000 · Arts & CultureISRAAID US GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE INC: $8,000 · Public Safety & Disaster
Other$417,500International$110,000Education$98,500Human Services$30,000Religion$17,000Arts & Culture$10,000Public Safety & Disaster$8,000

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 budgetGabriel Project Mumbai: $95,000 over 9y, 3.5% of budgetROCHELLE ZELL JEWISH HIGH SCHOOL: $57,500 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetCHICAGO JEWISH DAY SCHOOL: $38,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetJewish Child and Family Services: $14,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLIBENU: $13,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetSVIVAH INC: $11,000 over 3y, 3.3% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetISRAAID US GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE INC: $8,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE HINDA INSTITUTE: $3,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetNO SHAME ON U INC: $3,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetFOOTSTEPS INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSACRED SPACES: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHAZON INC: $2,000 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.

  • Who funds Gabriel Project Mumbai ↗
  • Who funds ROCHELLE ZELL JEWISH HIGH SCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds CHICAGO JEWISH DAY SCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds Jewish Child and Family Services ↗
  • Who funds LIBENU ↗
  • Who funds SVIVAH INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC ↗
  • Who funds ISRAAID US GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds ISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds THE HINDA INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds NO SHAME ON U INC ↗
  • Who funds FOOTSTEPS INC ↗
  • Who funds SACRED SPACES ↗
  • Who funds MAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger ↗
  • Who funds HAZON 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.

Arie and Ida Crown Me…Jewish Federation of …Charles and M R Shapi…Maury and Nancy Ferti…Upstart Bay AreaAmerican Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Arie and Ida Crown MemorialIL15.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Arie and Ida Crown Memorial · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · Charles and M R Shapiro Foundation Inc · Maury and Nancy Fertig Family Foundation · Upstart Bay Area · 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 Wilfred J Minkus Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Wilfred J Minkus Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–15%
    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 Wilfred J Minkus Charitable Trust?

    Find your warmest path to The Wilfred J Minkus Charitable Trust 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 29 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 Wilfred J Minkus’ 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