Skip to content
William Morris & Betty Rashkov Charitable at a glance

· Private foundation

William Morris & Betty Rashkov Charitable

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.

$175k
Granted FY2025still arriving
15
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$38k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Philanthropy$324kInternational$310kReligion$306kEducation$205kCivil Rights$121kHuman Services$86kRecreation & Sports$61kHealth$27kOther$0
02FY2025 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k8 grants · $50k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $124k
$9,704
Median grant
4
States reached
$3.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JEWISH FEDERATION OF NORTH AMERICA INC$37,542
HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM$28,221
HADASSAH THE WOMEN'S ZIONIST ORGANZATION$17,752
DISKIN ORPHAN HOME OF ISRAEL INC$10,204
GENERAL ISRAEL ORPHANS HOME FOR GIRLS$10,204
UNITED CHARITY INSTITUTIONS OF JERUSALEM$10,204
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM$10,204
CAMP SOLOMON SCHECHTER INC$9,704
AMERICAN CMTE OF SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL$8,587
ANTI DEFAMATION LEAGUE FOUNDATION$8,587
JEWISH WOMEN INTERNATIONAL$6,469
JEWISH NATIONAL FUND$6,469
TEMPLE BETH SHALOM$4,735
YESHIVA BETH ABRAHAM OF JERUSALEM INC$3,735
FRIENDS OF YAD LAKASHISHLIFELINE$2,117
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 (FY21–25, $75k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 85% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%FRIENDS OF YAD LAKASHISHLIFELINE FOR: $4k → 7%UNITED CHARITY INSTITUTIONS OF JERUSALEM: $23k → 20%FRIENDS OF YAD LAKASHISHLIFELINE: $2k → 7%FRIENDS OF YAD LAKASHISHLIFELINE FOR: $2k → 7%UNITED CHARITY INSTITUTIONS OF JERUSALEM: $12k → 20%FRIENDS OF YAD LAKASHISHLIFELINE FOR: $2k → 7%FRIENDS OF YAD LAKASHISHLIFELINE: $2k → 7%UNITED CHARITY INSTITUTIONS OF JERUSALEM: $10k → 20%UNITED CHARITY INSTITUTIONS OF JERUSALEM: $9k → 20%UNITED CHARITY INSTITUTIONS OF JERUSALEM: $9k → 20%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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.0M · 22 repeat orgs$128k to everyone else

22 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
8

Total granted

$1.0M
$128k

Still filing today

45%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalHuman ServicesCivil RightsReligionRecreation & 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

  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM
    5× · 2021–2025 · $63k · revenue +117%
  • CS
    Camp Solomon Schechter
    7× · 2019–2025 · $61k · revenue +135%
  • ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE FOUNDATION
    5× · 2021–2025 · $53k · revenue +78%

Funded once

  • JF
    JEWISH FEDERATION OF
    one grant, 2019 · $34k
  • HU
    HEBREW UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2019 · $23k
  • AA
    AMERICAN ASSOC-BIKUR CHOLIM
    one grant, 2020 · $13k
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
Sherit Isroel
—
2
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
3
University of Judaism Foundation
—
4
The Jerusalem Connection
—
5
Idf Memorial Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Yad Laniyim
Philanthropy
7
Jewish Life Foundation
—
8
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
9
Foundation for Conservative Judiasm of South Florida
—
10
National Council of Jewish Women Inc Jersey Hills Section
—
11
Delegation of Jewish American Students (Dojas)
—
12
Yad Yosef Foundation
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Yeshiva Beth Abraham of Jerusalem Inc; the most unlike its peers is United Charity of Jerusalem. 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

12 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. 12 of the 32 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)
12/12
Grantees still filing
7/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM: $182,149 · OtherHEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEMHADASSAH THE WOMEN'S ZIONIST ORGANZATION: $141,712 · OtherHADASSAH THE WOMEN'S ZIONIST ORGANZATIONHADASSAH THE WOMEN'S ZIONIST: $52,308 · OtherHADASSAH THE WOMEN'S ZIONISTJewish Women International: $40,865 · OtherJewish Women InternationalAMERICAN COMMITTEE OF SHAARE ZEDEK: $36,602 · OtherTEMPLE BETH SHALOM: $35,591 · OtherJEWISH FEDERATION OF: $33,712 · OtherUNITED CHARITY INSTITUTIONS OF: $24,277 · Other+13 more: $168,238 · Other+13 moreGENERAL ISRAEL ORPHAN HOME FOR GIRLS: $88,875 · InternationalGENERAL ISRAEL ORPHA…DISKIN ORPHAN HOME OF ISRAEL INC: $76,113 · InternationalDISKIN ORPHAN HOME O…AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $63,352 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF …JEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $40,865 · InternationalJEWISH NATIONAL FUND…THE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $265,781 · PhilanthropyTHE JEWISH FEDERATIO…United Charity of Jerusalem: $63,352 · Human ServicesFriends of Yad LKashishLifeline for the Old: $11,392 · Human ServicesANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE FOUNDATION: $52,960 · Civil RightsANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $20,314 · Civil RightsCamp Solomon Schechter: $60,809 · Recreation & SportsYESHIVA BETH ABRAHAM OF JERUSALEM INC: $21,784 · Religion
Other$715,454International$269,205Philanthropy$265,781Human Services$74,744Civil Rights$73,274Recreation & Sports$60,809Religion$21,784

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 JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $265,781 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetGENERAL ISRAEL ORPHAN HOME FOR GIRLS: $88,875 over 6y, 3.5% of budgetDISKIN ORPHAN HOME OF ISRAEL INC: $76,113 over 6y, 3.5% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $63,352 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetUnited Charity of Jerusalem: $63,352 over 5y, 4.7% of budgetCamp Solomon Schechter: $60,809 over 7y, 0.4% of budgetANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE FOUNDATION: $52,960 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $40,865 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetJewish Women International: $40,865 over 7y, 0.6% of budgetYESHIVA BETH ABRAHAM OF JERUSALEM INC: $21,784 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $20,314 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFriends of Yad LKashishLifeline for the Old: $11,392 over 5y, 0.7% 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 THE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds GENERAL ISRAEL ORPHAN HOME FOR GIRLS ↗
  • Who funds DISKIN ORPHAN HOME OF ISRAEL INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM ↗
  • Who funds United Charity of Jerusalem ↗
  • Who funds Camp Solomon Schechter ↗
  • Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC ↗
  • Who funds Jewish Women International ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA BETH ABRAHAM OF JERUSALEM INC ↗
  • Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
  • Who funds Friends of Yad LKashishLifeline for the Old ↗

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.

The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
The Bank of America Charitable Foundation IncNC8.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 William Morris & Betty Rashkov Charitable funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from William Morris & Betty Rashkov Charitable. 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%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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 32 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 William Morris & Betty Rashkov’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