· Public charity
American Friends of the Kiev Jewish Community
To nbsp;solicit nbsp;and nbsp;accept nbsp;contributions nbsp;and nbsp;grants nbsp;which nbsp;will nbsp;be nbsp;used nbsp;to nbsp;promote nbsp;jewish nbsp;educational nbsp;programs nbsp;and nbsp;activities nbsp;and nbsp;to nbsp;assist nbsp;individuals nbsp;and nbsp;institutions nbsp;in nbsp;need nbsp;of nbsp;financial nbsp;aid nbsp;in…
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 11 grants below total $1,134,043 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $8,330,729 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $7,196,686 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.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k5 grants · $30k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $55k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $165k
- $250k+1 grant · $884k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CONGREGATION ORACH CHAIM YOTSEI UKRAINE | $884,214 |
| CONGREGATION OHR YESHYA | $110,000 |
| CONG YESHIVAS MEOR HACHAIM | $55,000 |
| PROTEZ FOUNDATION | $33,000 |
| BIRKAS SHESH | $11,800 |
| FEDERATION OF JEWISH COMMUNITIES UKRAINE INC | $10,000 |
| CONG CHASDEI LEV | $9,726 |
| TORAH UMESORAH | $5,190 |
| CONGREGATION BETH DAVID | $5,113 |
| OZER DALIM OF LAKEWOOD INC | $5,000 |
| TELSHE YESHIVA-CHICAGO | $5,000 |
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 (FY23–25, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 86% 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.
Grants abroad, by region — $7.2M on the FY2025 return
Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: EDUCATION
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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
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.
5 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $178k 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
- COCONGREGATION ORACH CHAIM YOTSEI UKRAINE8× · 2017–2025 · $2.0M
- CYCONG YESHIVAS MEOR HACHAIM4× · 2022–2025 · $232k
- POPERSPECTIVES ON HOPE INC2× · 2021–2022 · $53k
Funded once
- YYYAD YISROELone grant, 2021 · $100k
- CRCongregation Rav Lehoshia Incone grant, 2022 · $60k · revenue 0%
- EUEAM USA LLCone grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue -9%
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.
To aid the poor and beedy with food, clothing abd spiritual gudiance
To facilitate and provide support for Jewish religious, educational, as well as charitable activities in Kharkov, Ukraine, for its Jewish community and for its refugees.
Support jewry in Israel
AFOMeomekHalevIncisformedforthereligiouscharitablepurposeofprovidingJewishministrytothespiritualandphysicalneedsofdisadvantagedJewishpersonsfamiliesandchildrenbetheylocatedintheNewYorkaroundtheUSinIsraelorelsewhere
The furtherance of primacy of orthodox jewish jurisprudence
Chevra USA exists to provide humanitarian aid to Jewish people, many of whom are elderly and Holocaust survivors, in the former Soviet Union, primarily Ukraine, Moldova and Poland, and in Israel. We operate soup kitchens and distribute…
To provide unaffiliated Jews with information and the ability to learn about their heritage.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Federation of Jewish Communities of Ukraine Inc and the most unlike its peers is Sparks of Daas Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 21 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 22% of your grantees by number, and just 12% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
11 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. 11 of the 29 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
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 Congregation Rav Lehoshia Inc ↗
- Who funds EAM USA LLC ↗
- Who funds Kedem for the Kiev Jewish Community ↗
- Who funds PROTEZ FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Vaad Hatzedaka Inc ↗
- Who funds Care for Kiev Inc ↗
- Who funds Federation of Jewish Communities of Ukraine INC ↗
- Who funds FEDERATION OF JEWISH COMMUNITIES OF THE CIS INC ↗
- Who funds SPARKS OF DAAS INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL SOCIETY FOR HEBREW DAY SCHOOLS ↗
- Who funds KEREN HATZEDAKA INC ↗
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: The Ojc Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · 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.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization American Friends of the Kiev Jewish Community 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.
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 American Friends of the Kiev Jewish Community?
Find your warmest path to American Friends of the Kiev Jewish Community 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.