· Private foundation
Alan B Slifka Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k26 grants · $70k
- $10k–50k14 grants · $273k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $200k
- $250k+2 grants · $2.6M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CONTRIBUTIONS TO OTHER PUBLIC CHARITIES - SEE STMT 13 | $2,086,900 |
| CLUB OF MADRID FOUNDATION INC | $487,500 |
| YALE UNIVERSITY | $150,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS | $50,000 |
| GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION | $45,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $40,000 |
| SAMUEL WAXMAN CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION | $33,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR AUTISM RESEARCH | $25,000 |
| MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING | $25,000 |
| AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE UMM EL FAHEM MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART | $15,000 |
| COMMUNITY PARTNERS | $15,000 |
| HEART OF A NATION | $15,000 |
| CYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATION PENNSYLVANIA | $10,000 |
| NATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS | $10,000 |
| PROVIDENCE SAINT JOHN'S HEALTH CENTER FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–23, $136k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 96% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +40% since the first grant, against +34% for the ones you funded once.
129 repeat relationships — 28 still active in FY2024, 101 since wound down; 13 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $359k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- AJABRAHAM JOSHUA HESCHEL SCHOOL5× · 2017–2021 · $5.0M · revenue +66%
- COCLUB OF MADRID FOUNDATION INC7× · 2017–2024 · $2.9M · revenue +1% · 100% of their budget
- TATHE ABRAHAM INITIATIVES INC6× · 2017–2022 · $1.4M · revenue +6%
Funded once
- PPEFone grant, 2019 · $280k
- MOMORASHA OLAMI INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $165k · revenue +59%
- YUYALE UNIVERSITYone grant, 2019 · $121k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
The jewish agency binds jews across ideologies and civilizations together in a worldwide jewish family with israel at its center. it provides the global framework for aliyah, ensures global jewish safety, strengthens jewish identity and…
The weizmann institute of science, located in rehovot, israel, is one of the worlds top-ranking, multidisciplinary research institutions. at any one time, several thousand scientists, staff and students are involved in hundreds of research…
AJC's mission is to enhance the wellbeing of the Jewish people and Israel, and to advance human rights and democratic values in the United States and around the world. In pursuit of this mission, AJC advances democratic principles, fights…
We fundraise in the u.s. to support, and raise awareness of, bar-ilan university in israel.
Biu produces students who excel in the sciences, humanities, law, engineering, business & the arts.
The organization's mission is to engage in non partisan analysis of u.s. foreign policy in the middle east, with special emphasis on the middle east peace process, and to present policymakers in the united states, in the region and in the…
The american technion society supports the technion's critical research and (continued on sch o)
The university is composed of several colleges and schools providing undergraduate, graduate, professional and post-doctoral education and training and research and clinical programs.
We steward $1.5 billion in charitable assets through donor-advised funds, endowments, and other giving vehicles. partnering with 1,400 individuals, families, and organizations, we build enduring legacies and multigenerational impact. in…
The israel institute, inc. (the institute) enhances knowledge about modern israel by ensuring that more students have access to courses about israel during their time on campus.
The principal and primary intent of the organization is to support kohelet policy forum (the "forum"), a jerusalem-based non-profit policy center founded in 2012, comprised of leading academics and researchers.
To strengthen and expand the u.s.-israel relationship in ways that enhance the security of the united states and israel.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Friends of Hebrew University Inc and the most unlike its peers is Eigen-Arnett Educational and. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 39 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 10% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
186 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 186 of the 266 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds ABRAHAM JOSHUA HESCHEL SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds CLUB OF MADRID FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE ABRAHAM INITIATIVES INC ↗
- Who funds PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds UNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds COLUMBIABARNARD HILLEL INC ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds THE SHALOM HARTMAN INSTITUTE OF NORTH AMERICA ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST ↗
- Who funds SAMUEL WAXMAN CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital Foundation ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FUNDERS NETWORK ↗
- Who funds MILKWEED EDITIONS INC ↗
- Who funds JOSEPH SLIFKA CENTER FOR JEWISH LIFE AT ↗
- Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds MORASHA OLAMI INC ↗
- Who funds ISRAEL CANCER RESEARCH FUND INC ↗
- Who funds HAND IN HAND AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE CENTER FOR JEWISH-ARAB EDUCATION IN ISRA ↗
- Who funds HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE ↗
- Who funds University of Arizona Foundation ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Fjc · Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Metrowest NJ · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · The Jewish Federation of Greater Washington Inc · Greater Miami Jewish Federation Inc · Newton & Rochelle Becker Charitable Trus · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · Jewish Community Foundation of San Diego · California Community Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Alan B Slifka Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Alan B Slifka Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Alan B Slifka Foundation 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.