Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Birmingham Jewish Foundation Inc

The birmingham jewish foundation is dedicated to nurturing and promoting jewish life in birmingham, nationally, in israel and throughout the world; is involved in building a better birmingham through alliances and partnerships with other community groups, and is committed to helping all people in need in times of crisis.

$2.7M
Granted FY2024still arriving
23
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$971k
Largest
01What you fund
0199% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172024.

Philanthropy$6.7MEducation$2.2MHuman Services$1.6MReligion$1.2MArts & Culture$412kCommunity Improvement$146kYouth Development$136kFood & Nutrition$69kOther$0
02FY2024 · 23 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 23 grants below total $2,220,566 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $2,650,546 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $429,980 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k14 grants · $273k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $517k
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.4M
$20,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$42M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BIRMINGHAM JEWISH FEDERATION INC$970,897
NE MILES JEWISH DAY SCHOOL$439,615
ATLANTA SCHOLARS KOLLEL$187,500
COLLAT JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES$143,171
HENRY S JACOBS CAMP$115,694
LEVITE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER$71,014
TEMPLE BETH-EL FOUNDATION$40,000
CHABAD OF ALABAMA$38,000
TEMPLE B'NAI SHALOM$31,228
TEMPLE BETH EL$24,236
ACTION AGAINST HUNGER$20,000
INDIAN SPRINGS SCHOOL$20,000
Individual grant recipient$20,000
NATIONAL JEWISH ADVOCACY CENTER$16,667
TEMPLE BETH SHALOM$12,700
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:

Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $1.4M) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%LEVITE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER ENDOWMENT: $520k → 16%COLLAT JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES ENDOWMENT FUND TOTAL: $309k → 16%COLLAT JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $143k → 16%COLLAT JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES ENDOWMENT FUND TOTAL: $107k → 16%COLLAT JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES ENDOWMENT FUND TOTAL: $102k → 16%LEVITE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $88k → 16%COLLAT JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $59k → 16%COLLAT JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES ENDOWMENT FUND TOTAL: $51k → 16%COLLAT JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES ENDOWMENT FUND TOTAL: $35k → 16%LEVITE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $19k → 16%LEVITE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $9k → 16%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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$8.4M · 43 repeat orgs$905k to everyone else

43 repeat relationships — 16 still active in FY2024, 27 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

43
31

Total granted

$8.4M
$639k

Still filing today

7%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $267k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesEducationOther

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

  • NE
    N E MILES JEWISH DAY SCHOOL
    8× · 2017–2024 · $1.6M · revenue +27% · 35% of their budget
  • CJ
    COLLAT JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES OF BIRMINGHAM
    8× · 2017–2024 · $805k · revenue +33%
  • LJ
    LEVITE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER
    5× · 2017–2021 · $636k · revenue +3%

Funded once

  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM
    one grant, 2023 · $140k
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM
    2× · 2019–2020 · $100k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $41k

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

4 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 4 of the 82 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
4/4
Grantees still filing
3/4
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

BIRMINGHAM JEWISH FEDERATION INC — $1,915,049 · OtherBIRMINGHAM JEWISH FEDERATION INCIndividual grant recipient — $282,900 · OtherTEMPLE BETH EL — $276,147 · OtherUNITED WAY OF CENTRAL — $211,750 · Other+74 more — $3,614,425 · Other+74 moreBIRMINGHAM JEWISH FEDERATION INC — $3,367,247 · PhilanthropyBIRMINGHAM JEWISH FEDERATION I…N E MILES JEWISH DAY SCHOOL — $1,564,840 · EducationN E MILES JEW…COLLAT JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES OF BIRMINGHAM — $804,903 · Human ServicesCOLLAT JEWIS…LEVITE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER — $636,306 · Human ServicesLEVITE JEWIS…
Other$6,300,271Philanthropy$3,367,247Education$1,564,840Human Services$1,441,209

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 budgetBIRMINGHAM JEWISH FEDERATION INC — $3,367,247 over 6y, 36% of budgetN E MILES JEWISH DAY SCHOOL — $1,564,840 over 8y, 35% of budgetCOLLAT JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES OF BIRMINGHAM — $804,903 over 8y, 22% of budgetLEVITE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER — $636,306 over 5y, 7.2% 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 BIRMINGHAM JEWISH FEDERATION INC
  • Who funds N E MILES JEWISH DAY SCHOOL
  • Who funds COLLAT JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES OF BIRMINGHAM
  • Who funds LEVITE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER

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 Frank & Fred Friedman Family FoundationCA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Frank & Fred Friedman Family Foundation · Lisa and Alan Engel Foundation · The Community Foundation of Greater Birmingham · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Birmingham Jewish Foundation Inc 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report 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, FY2025

    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.

    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 82 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph