Skip to content
Arthur & Sally Dordek Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Arthur & Sally Dordek Charitable Foundation

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.

$21k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$12k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Religion$48kPhilanthropy$36kEducation$4kHuman Services$2kArts & Culture$882Housing & Shelter$221Health$122Other$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $9k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $12k
$770
Median grant
1
States reached
$64k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VARIOUS CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS$12,170
ASSOCIATED TALMUD TORAHS OF CHICAGO$5,000
CONGREGATION EZRAS ISRAEL$1,521
HEBREW THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE$770
NCSY$540
KEHILLAH JEWISH EDUCATION FUND$432
CONGREGATION KINS OF WEST ROGERS PARK$283
CHICAGO CHESED FUND$67
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 (FY22–25, $963) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%BONEI OLAM: $36 → 20%CHICAGO CHESED FUND: $667 → 14%CHICAGO CHESED FUND: $193 → 14%CHICAGO CHESED FUND: $67 → 14%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$89k · 14 repeat orgs$4k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +63% since the first grant, against +10% for those funded once.

14 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
32

Total granted

$89k
$4k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+63%
+10%

Still filing today

29%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationPhilanthropyReligionHuman ServicesArts & CultureHealthOther
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

  • JU
    JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO
    4× · 2020–2024 · $10k · revenue +13%
  • CM
    CHICAGO MEZUZAH AND MITZVAH CAMPAIGN
    3× · 2022–2024 · $2k · revenue +63%
  • KJ
    KEHILLAH JEWISH EDUCATION FUND
    3× · 2023–2025 · $1k · revenue +96%

Funded once

  • CC
    CHICAGO CENTER TORAH CHESED
    one grant, 2024 · $823
  • KF
    KEHILAH FUND
    one grant, 2022 · $420
  • RZ
    RELIGIOUS ZIONISTS OF AMERICA MIZRACHI HAPOEL HAMIZRACHI INC
    one grant, 2022 · $312 · revenue -38%
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
University of Judaism Foundation
—
2
Sherit Isroel
—
3
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
4
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
5
Jewish Life Foundation
—
6
Chabad Lametayel Inc

encourage and facilitate the observance of traditional orthodox Jewish practices around the world.

—
7
American Friends of Oseh Chayil

To further jewish education in israel

Religion
8
Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation
Philanthropy
9
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
10
Us Israel Education Fund Inc
—
11
Zichron Chaim Meir Foundation
Philanthropy
12
Foundation for Conservative Judiasm of South Florida
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Society for Yad Vashem Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Dresher Foundation Inc. 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

17 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. 17 of the 47 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
13/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VARIOUS CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS: $26,447 · OtherVARIOUS CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONSSUNDRY-ORGANIZED CHARITIES: $18,323 · OtherSUNDRY-ORGANIZED CHARITIESASSOCIATED TALMUD TORAHS OF CHICAGO: $12,836 · OtherASSOCIATED TALMUD TORAHS OF CHICAGOCONGREGATION EZRAS ISRAEL: $5,170 · OtherCONGREGATION EZRAS ISRAELIndividual grant recipient: $3,900 · OtherIDA CROWN JEWISH ACADEMY INC: $2,823 · Other+28 more: $9,554 · Other+28 moreJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $9,800 · PhilanthropyJEWISH UNITE…+1 more: $90 · PhilanthropyCHICAGO MEZUZAH AND MITZVAH CAMPAIGN: $1,598 · ReligionJEWISH SACRED SOCIETY INC: $72 · ReligionKEHILLAH JEWISH EDUCATION FUND: $1,260 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA FOUNDATION INC: $54 · EducationCHICAGO CHESED FUND: $927 · Human ServicesBonei Olam Inc: $36 · Human ServicesAMERICAN SOCIETY FOR YAD VASHEM INC: $72 · Arts & CultureThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $36 · Arts & CultureCHAI LIFELINE INC: $50 · HealthJBI INTERNATIONAL INC: $36 · HealthCHILDRENS VILLAGE OF JERUSALEM INC: $18 · International
Other$79,053Philanthropy$9,890Religion$1,670Education$1,314Human Services$963Arts & Culture$108Health$86International$18

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $9,800 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCHICAGO MEZUZAH AND MITZVAH CAMPAIGN: $1,598 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetKEHILLAH JEWISH EDUCATION FUND: $1,260 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCHICAGO CHESED FUND: $927 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetRELIGIOUS ZIONISTS OF AMERICA MIZRACHI HAPOEL HAMIZRACHI INC: $312 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHEBRON FUND INC: $90 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN SOCIETY FOR YAD VASHEM INC: $72 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH SACRED SOCIETY INC: $72 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA FOUNDATION INC: $54 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA: $54 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $36 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE DRESHER FOUNDATION INC: $36 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBonei Olam Inc: $36 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJBI INTERNATIONAL INC: $36 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPEYLIM LEV LACHIM: $36 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDRENS VILLAGE OF JERUSALEM INC: $18 over 1y, 0.0% 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 JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO ↗
  • Who funds CHICAGO MEZUZAH AND MITZVAH CAMPAIGN ↗
  • Who funds KEHILLAH JEWISH EDUCATION FUND ↗
  • Who funds CHICAGO CHESED FUND ↗
  • Who funds RELIGIOUS ZIONISTS OF AMERICA MIZRACHI HAPOEL HAMIZRACHI INC ↗
  • Who funds HEBRON FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR YAD VASHEM INC ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH SACRED SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds AGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗
  • Who funds The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ↗

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.

Jewish Federation of …Bitton Family Foundat…The Novick Family Fou…The Howard Ross Famil…Aj & Sl Stern Family …Hasson Family Foundat…Noah Wolff Family Fou…Lev Zahav NFPJewish United Fund of…Todd a and Raphaela S…Jewish Communal FundSidney and Lisa Glenn…
Jewish Federation of Metropolitan ChicagoIL23.3× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · Bitton Family Foundation Inc · The Novick Family Foundation · The Howard Ross Family Foundation · Aj & Sl Stern Family Foundation · Hasson Family Foundation · Noah Wolff Family Foundation Inc · Lev Zahav NFP · Jewish United Fund of Metropolitan Chicago · Todd a and Raphaela Stern Family Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Sidney and Lisa Glenner Foundation

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 Arthur & Sally Dordek Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Arthur & Sally Dordek Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Arthur & Sally Dordek Charitable Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Arthur & Sally Dordek Charitable 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.

    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 47 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 Arthur & Sally Dordek’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