· Private foundation
Conduit Foundation
Its FY2023 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 FY2017–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2023
- $10k–50k1 grant · $48k
- $50k–250k6 grants · $615k
- $250k+9 grants · $25M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS | $6,018,000 |
| WESTERN NEW ENGLAND INSTITUTE FOR PSYCHOANALYSIS FUND | $5,000,000 |
| SHALEM FOUNDATION | $4,250,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $3,275,000 |
| HATZOLAH EMERGENCY AIR RESPONSE | $2,050,000 |
| FIDELITY CHARITABLE FUND - WHITE ROSE FUND | $1,698,522 |
| THE CENTRAL FUND OF ISRAEL | $1,565,001 |
| THE AMERICAN JEWISH JOINT DISTRIBUTION COMMITTEE | $1,000,000 |
| CHABAD LUBAVITCH OF THE USVI | $540,000 |
| ISRAEL SELECT CHARITY | $150,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $100,000 |
| ISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE | $100,000 |
| FRIENDS OF EMEK LONE SOLDIERS | $100,000 |
| UJA FEDERATION GREENWICH | $100,000 |
| EILAT CHARITIES INC | $65,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 74% of your 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 +68% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
23 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2023, 12 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (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 FY2023, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6.9M 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
- TSThe Shalem Foundation5× · 2018–2023 · $7.8M · revenue +193%
- CFCentral Fund of Israel6× · 2017–2023 · $3.6M · revenue +145%
The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc6× · 2017–2023 · $3.0M · revenue +24%
Funded once
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF PEACE OF MIND INCone grant, 2021 · $1.3M · revenue +18% · 70% of their budget
- AIASIF Incone grant, 2018 · $100k
- FOFRIENDS OF JERUSALEM INTERNATIONAL YMCAone grant, 2018 · $50k · revenue -91%
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 promote, benefit, and support Jewish religious, charitable & educational activities in Israel and the USA.
To further jewish education in israel
To voluntarily assist the house of religious learning known as yeshiva neveh zion in israel
To foster jewish religious education and disseminate the teachings of rabbi nachman of breslov through publication and distribution of books and cds, as well as seminars, lectures and study groups.
Friends of Jerusalem's mission is to provide assistance to the needs and indigent living in Jerusalem and all of Israel.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Israel Education Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is The University of the Virgin Islands. 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 37 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% 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.
25 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. 25 of the 42 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 PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds The Shalem Foundation ↗
- Who funds Central Fund of Israel ↗
- Who funds The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF PEACE OF MIND INC ↗
- Who funds Carmel Academy ↗
- Who funds JEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC ↗
- Who funds FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND ↗
- Who funds UJA FEDERATION OF GREENWICH INC ↗
- Who funds ISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds WESTCHESTER HEBREW HIGH SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds Foundation for the Defense of Democracies Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ISRAEL EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ISRAEL SCHOLARSHIP EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF HERZOG HOSPITAL INC ↗
- Who funds JOSEPH SLIFKA CENTER FOR JEWISH LIFE AT ↗
- Who funds EILAT CHARITIES INC ↗
- Who funds Friends of Emek Lone Soldiers Inc ↗
- Who funds ASIF Inc ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF JERUSALEM INTERNATIONAL YMCA ↗
- Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF SHAVEI YISRAEL 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: Jewish Communal Fund · Fjc · Jewish Community Foundation of San Diego · Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Conduit 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.
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 Conduit Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Conduit 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.