· Private foundation
Dana Cheryl Beitscher Charitable Fdn
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
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.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k5 grants · $13k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $17k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| YESHIVA HIGH SCHOOL OF AZ | $16,758 |
| TIFERES STAM INC | $4,688 |
| CYPRESS CHURCH OF GONZALES | $4,000 |
| CONG BETH ISRAEL OF PHOENIX AZ | $3,135 |
| YESHIVA SHAAREI TORAH | $1,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $180 |
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 US giving — 88% of grant dollars ($459k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 12% that went abroad ($61k) is mapped below.
Your human-services grants (FY18–24, $720) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
Beyond the US — 12% of all-years giving ($61k)
3 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
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.
20 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 16 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k 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
- YHYESHIVA HIGH SCHOOL OF ARIZONA7× · 2017–2025 · $237k · revenue +285%
- STSHEARIM TORAH HIGH SCHOOL INC2× · 2021–2022 · $2k · revenue +67%
- YDYESHIVA DERECH CHAIM3× · 2017–2019 · $840 · revenue +33%
Funded once
- STSCOTTSDALE TORAH CTR AHAVAS TORAHone grant, 2017 · $10k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2019 · $5k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2019 · $4k
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 the furtherance of jewish religious and rabbinic education on a college and graduate level in israel and to increase the dissemination of scholarly research works in the fields of torah, talmud and halacha.
Support advanced educational and religious institution in israel.
The organization's primary mission is charitable and religious in nature, supporting judaic and rabbinical education by providing financial assistance to institutions of jewish learning, currently through grants to shaare mordechai in…
Raise funds for religious and educational institutions in the state of israel, and to provide funds to needy individuals in the state of israel.
Keren hayeshivot trust supports religious institutions of higher education in the united states and israel to raise the level of torah and halachic observance in the sephardic orthodox jewish community.
To promote, assist, and sponsor the spreading of Jewish religious education in Israel. The organization will also organize inspirational gatherings in the USA to enhance the participants' Torah knowledge.
To support the haredi community in israel. the haredi community is commonly referred to as ultra-orthodox jews. it is estimated that over 50% of haredi children live below the poverty line. the organization accomplishes this by providing…
Keren hayeshivot fund supports religious institutions of higher education in the united states and israel to raise the level of torah and halachic observance in the sephardic orthodox jewish community.
Yad vashem usa foundation (the organization) is dedicated to support the memorialization and awareness of, and education regarding, the holocaust, as currently overseen, supervised and conducted by yad vashem, the holocaust martyrs and…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Shearim Torah High School Inc and the most unlike its peers is Jewish National Fund (Keren Kayemeth Leisrael) 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 17 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 28% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 16% 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.
17 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. 17 of the 81 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 YESHIVA HIGH SCHOOL OF ARIZONA ↗
- Who funds JEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC ↗
- Who funds SHEARIM TORAH HIGH SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds THE MILTON H ERICKSON FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds West Coast Vaad Hachesed ↗
- Who funds CHADD INC CHILDREN AND ADULTS WITH ATTENTION DEFICIT/HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER ↗
- Who funds PHOENIX POLICE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds LYMEDISEASEORG ↗
- Who funds EHLERS-DANLOS SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN ARIZONA ↗
- Who funds DYSAUTONOMIA INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA DERECH CHAIM ↗
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 · The Ojc Fund · The Zev and Susan Munk Family Foundation · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Aj & Sl Stern Family Foundation · Zichron Yechiel Mechel Foundation · Marbeh Shalom Foundation Inc · National Society for Hebrew Day Schools · The Setton Foundation · Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore · AbbVie Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust 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 Dana Cheryl Beitscher Charitable Fdn 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.
- Chadd Inc Children and Adults With Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder — 31% of income from government
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 Dana Cheryl Beitscher Charitable Fdn?
Find your warmest path to Dana Cheryl Beitscher Charitable Fdn 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.