Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

American Friends of Israel Organizations Inc

Funding of organizations qualified under section 501(c) or equivalent as operating for charitable, religious, or educational purposes, or that would so qualify based on the nature of such organization's operations

$14M
Granted FY2023
2
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$1.1M
Largest
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 100% of AMERICAN FRIENDS OF ISRAEL ORGANIZATIONS INC’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2023 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 2 grants below total $1,391,198 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $14,102,098 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $12,710,900 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

$1,091,198
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Khal Beis Aba$1,091,198
CONG AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED$300,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 100% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%CONG OF ECHO RIDGE: $7k → 14%CONG MOSAD KEREN HATZOLE: $400k → 20%CONG MOSAD KEREN HATZOLE: $275k → 20%CONG MOSAD KEREN HATZOLA: $100k → 20%TOVA UVRUCHA INC: $100k → 20%UNITED MOSDOS TORAH VEYIRAH YERUSHOLYIM INC: $30k → 20%BEER MIRIAM INC: $10k → 20%CONG AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED: $300k → 20%KHAL BLEV ECHOD: $30k → 20%CONG AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED: $15k → 20%CONG AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INC: $15k → 20%CONG BOYANER KLOIZ TIFERETH MORDECHAI SHLOMO: $10k → 20%THE RABBI SOLOMON KLUGER SCHOOL INC: $70k → 20%Khal Beis Aba: $1.1M → 20%KHAL BEIS ABA: $85k → 20%CONG YESHIVAS BAIS MOSHE: $24k → 20%ATERES ZVI: $12k → 20%CONG EMUNAS YISROEL: $6k → 20%YESHIVA GEDOLEH OHR YISROEL: $20k → 20%YESHIVA GEDOLEH OHR YISROEL: $17k → 20%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$2.4M · 4 repeat orgs$284k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2023, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
10

Total granted

$2.4M
$284k

Still filing today

0%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

  • KB
    Khal Beis Aba
    2× · 2017–2023 · $1.2M
  • CM
    CONG MOSAD KEREN HATZOLE
    4× · 2017–2023 · $1.1M
  • UM
    UNITED MOSDOS TORAH VEYIRAH YERUSHOLYIM INC
    2× · 2017–2019 · $80k

Funded once

  • TU
    TOVA UVRUCHA INC
    one grant, 2017 · $100k
  • TR
    THE RABBI SOLOMON KLUGER SCHOOL INC
    one grant, 2017 · $70k
  • KB
    KHAL B LEV ECHOD
    one grant, 2018 · $30k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
04the grantee network

1 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2023.

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 20172023, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 1 of the 14 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
0/1
Grantees still filing
0/1
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Khal Beis Aba — $1,176,198 · OtherKhal Beis AbaCONG MOSAD KEREN HATZOLE — $1,090,000 · OtherCONG MOSAD KEREN HATZOLETOVA UVRUCHA INC — $100,000 · Other+11 more — $300,700 · Other+11 more
Other$2,666,898

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetATERES ZVI FUND — $12,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budget
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 ATERES ZVI FUND

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.

The Ojc FundNY24.9× affinity11 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to American Friends of Israel Organizations Inc?

Find your warmest path to American Friends of Israel Organizations Inc 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 14 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record but names no grant recipient (grants abroad are filed by region only, and grants under $5,000 are not itemized), so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph