Max H. Gluck Foundation Inc

Annual Giving
$5.4M
Grant Range
$25K - $0.4M

Ready to apply to Max H. Gluck Foundation Inc?

Let our AI help you write a winning grant application in minutes, not hours.

Start your 4-week free trial →

Max H. Gluck Foundation Inc

Quick Stats

  • Annual Giving: $5,440,853 (2023)
  • Success Rate: Not publicly available (invitation-only)
  • Decision Time: Not publicly disclosed
  • Grant Range: Varies; average grant $130,541
  • Geographic Focus: National, with emphasis on California and New York
  • Total Assets: $116 million

Contact Details

Address: PO Box 55516, Sherman Oaks, CA 91413

Phone: (310) 519-7011

Website: www.gluckfoundation.org

Email: Not publicly listed

Overview

Founded in 1982 by Maxwell Gluck and shaped by the vision of Muriel Gluck, the Max H. Gluck Foundation has been supporting arts and education programmes for over four decades. Since 1996, the foundation has been led by Dr. Jon Kaswick, who serves as the sole corporation member and board president. With assets totalling over $116 million, the foundation awarded $5.4 million in grants to 37 organisations in 2023. The foundation's mission is to "support programmes that address the educational, health, cultural, and creative needs of the underserved," with a particular focus on enabling individuals to "realise their full potential" through arts and education programmes that serve underserved communities across the United States.

Funding Priorities

Grant Programmes

The foundation operates on an invitation-only basis with grants awarded to preselected charitable organisations. Based on recent awards, typical grants include:

  • Small to Medium Grants: $25,000 (e.g., CSArts-SGV inaugural year funding)
  • Large Multi-year Grants: $442,900 (e.g., UC Riverside Gluck Fellows Programme)
  • Average Grant Size: $130,541

Priority Areas

The foundation focuses exclusively on:

Arts Education Programmes:

  • Performing arts (music, dance, theatre) in educational settings
  • Visual arts museum programmes and instruction
  • Arts programmes in healthcare facilities
  • Youth orchestral and instrumental education
  • Creative writing and immersive learning experiences

Underserved Populations:

  • Low-income students receiving tuition-free arts education
  • Students in Title I schools
  • Communities with limited access to arts programming
  • Patients in healthcare facilities
  • Youth ages 5-18 in underserved neighbourhoods

Programme Characteristics They Support:

  • Free or low-cost arts programming
  • Outreach to schools, libraries, senior centres, and nontraditional venues
  • Programmes promoting creativity, cross-disciplinary knowledge, and critical thinking
  • Fellowship programmes for post-graduate artists working in community settings

What They Don't Fund

While not explicitly stated on their website, the foundation's focus clearly excludes:

  • Programmes outside arts and education
  • Organisations not serving underserved populations
  • Capital campaigns or endowments (based on project-focused funding pattern)
  • Programmes without a clear educational or community engagement component

Governance and Leadership

Board of Directors

  • Dr. Jon Kaswick – Board President (assumed leadership in 1996)
  • Dr. Julie Kaswick – Board Secretary
  • Dr. Jennifer Kaswick – Board Member
  • Cathy Hession – Board Member
  • Dr. Hetal Patel – Board Member
  • Richard Reinis – Board Member

Staff

  • Jessica Kaswick – Executive Director & Board Member (full-time, compensation: $201,333)

The foundation is led by the Kaswick family, demonstrating a commitment to continuing the legacy of founders Maxwell and Muriel Gluck. The board emphasises youth arts access through innovative outreach programmes serving thousands of children annually.

Application Process & Timeline

How to Apply

This foundation does not have a public application process. The Max H. Gluck Foundation only makes contributions to preselected charitable organisations and explicitly does not accept unsolicited requests for funds.

Grants are awarded at the discretion of the board of directors to organisations they have identified and selected for funding. The foundation proactively identifies programmes that align with their mission rather than responding to external applications.

Decision Timeline

Not publicly disclosed. As an invitation-only funder, the foundation operates on its own timeline for identifying, vetting, and awarding grants to selected organisations.

Success Rates

Success rates are not applicable as the foundation does not accept unsolicited applications. In 2023, the foundation made 37 awards, maintaining a consistent pattern (38 awards in 2021, 35 awards in 2022).

Reapplication Policy

Not applicable due to invitation-only funding model.

Application Success Factors

Since this is an invitation-only funder, traditional application success factors do not apply. However, examining their funded projects reveals what attracts their support:

Programme Characteristics of Funded Organisations:

  1. Established Arts Education Programmes: The foundation supports well-established institutions with proven track records, including UCLA, UC Riverside, Loyola Marymount University, Carnegie Hall/Juilliard, LA Philharmonic, and LA County Museum of Art.

  2. Direct Service to Underserved Youth: Funded programmes consistently demonstrate direct engagement with underserved populations, such as:

    • Boys & Girls Clubs of LA Harbor serving "over 200 youth per day, ages 5-14, free of charge"
    • The Colburn School's programmes that are "tuition-free for low-income students"
    • LA Phil's YOLA programme providing "access to free, high quality instrumental and orchestral education"
  3. Scale and Reach: Programmes that reach significant numbers of beneficiaries, such as UCLA's Gluck Fellows performing at "over 150 schools, libraries, senior centres, and other nontraditional venues throughout Los Angeles County"

  4. Innovation in Access: The foundation values creative approaches to reaching underserved audiences, including art mobiles visiting public schools, performances in healthcare facilities, and programmes bringing arts to nontraditional venues.

  5. Quality and Excellence: Despite serving underserved populations, programmes maintain high artistic standards (evidenced by partnerships with institutions like Carnegie Hall, Juilliard, and major philharmonic orchestras).

Key Takeaways for Grant Writers

  • No unsolicited applications accepted: This foundation operates exclusively on an invitation-only basis. There is no application portal or process for organisations to submit proposals.

  • Focus is narrow and deep: The foundation supports only arts education programmes serving underserved populations. Programmes outside this focus should not expect consideration.

  • Established institutions favoured: Funded organisations tend to be well-established institutions with proven track records rather than emerging or grassroots organisations.

  • Geographic concentration: While the foundation supports organisations nationally, there is significant concentration in California (particularly Los Angeles area) and New York.

  • Long-term relationships: The foundation appears to maintain ongoing relationships with grantees, suggesting that once selected, organisations may receive continued support.

  • Multi-year and substantial grants: With an average grant of $130,541 and some grants exceeding $400,000, this is a significant funder for organisations fortunate enough to be selected.

  • Visibility in the sector matters: Organisations should focus on building strong reputations in arts education and serving underserved communities, as the foundation proactively identifies exemplary programmes in this space.

References

Information accessed December 2024

🎯 You've done the research. Now write an application they can't refuse.

Hinchilla combines funder's specific priorities with your organisation's past successful grants and AI analysis of what reviewers want to see.

Data privacy and security by default

Your organisation's past successful grants and experience

AI analysis of what reviewers want to see

A compelling draft application in 10 minutes instead of 10 hours

Spotted something that needs correcting? Let us know