Loading…
· Private foundation
DANIEL & CHAYALA GLENNER FOUNDATION
This foundation accepts unsolicited grant applications.
$94k
Granted FY2025
28
Grants
1
Communities
$31k
Largest
01What you fund
01
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 92% of DANIEL & CHAYALA GLENNER FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2020
orchosyeshiva meormeor hatorahkhal ohrcongtorahchesed
2021
congyeshiva
2022
dachs hachnosashachnosas kallahkollelchicago
2023
congregationkahl ohryisocher chodorovchaimbaischicagoyeshiva
2024
mesivtahatorahchicagoyeshivakollel
2025
kahalmesivtahatorahchicagoyeshivabais
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2025 · 28 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k26 grants · $43k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $51k
$1,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$1k
Total assets
Largest grants
- THE DONORS FUND$30,779
- KAHAL ZIDICHOV CHODROV$20,560
- KAHAL ZICHRON YOEL$5,000
- AGUDATH ISRAEL OF ILLINOIS$4,344
- YESHIVAS KESSER YONAH$4,310
- MIDWEST BAIS HORAAH$3,600
- MISCELLANEOUS ORGANIZED CHARTIES$3,372
- TELSHE YESHIVA CHICAGO$2,500
- YESHIVA DERECH HATORAH$1,980
- HATZALAH CHICAGO$1,640
- AHAVAS TORAH$1,560
- MESIVTA SHAAREI ADIRIM$1,500
- CAMP NAGEELA MIDWEST$1,500
- MESIVTA OF CLIFTON$1,500
- THE KEHILLA JEWISH EDUCATION FUND$1,200
02The need
04
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 (FY20–25, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — 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.
78%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$381k · 30 repeat orgs$108k to everyone else
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +87% since the first grant, against +70% for the ones you funded once.
30 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
30
46
Total granted
$381k
$79k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+87%
+70%
Still filing today
20%
0%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
ReligionEducationHealthHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsOther
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
- YKYESHIVAS KESSER YONAH2× · 2024–2025 · $8k · revenue +127%
- CNCAMP NAGEELA MIDWEST4× · 2022–2025 · $7k · revenue +137%
- HCHATZALAH CHICAGO4× · 2020–2025 · $4k · revenue +219%
Funded once
- MOMISCELLANEOUS ORGANIZED CHARITIESone grant, 2021 · $21k
- KOKAHL OHR YISOCHERone grant, 2022 · $10k
- VOVARIOUS ORGANIZED CHARITESone grant, 2020 · $6k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
04Your field
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.
1
Chabad of River North and Fulton Market
Chabad of River North and Fulton Market is an organization dedicated to furthering the religious, educational, and chartable needs of the Jewish Community and /or of the neighbors of River North and Fulton Market.
Religion
2
Kehillah Jewish Education Fund
Make an authentic jewish education, coupled with an excellent secular education, available and affordable to all jewish families in the chicagoland community.
Education
3
Yeshiva Har Torah
A religious school providing teaching facilities of jewish faith, history, literature, jewish life and ideals.
—
4
Yeshiva Gedolah Rabbinical College
Provide college level education and extensive background of jewish law and talmudic studies and rabbinical ordination.
Education
5
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
6
Yeshiva Derech Hatorah
To create a learning environment with jewish tradition and values that strives to help every student attain their highest educational goal.
Education
7
Yeshiva of Los Angeles Girls High School
The organization is an accredited high school with a complete curriculum. general and judaic studies are emphasized.
—
8
Kollel Torah Mitzion Inc
The mission of the yeshiva university torah mitzion kollel of chicago is to nurture the spiritual growth of the greater chicago jewish community.
Religion
9
Mesivta High School of Greater
The mesivta high school of greater philadelphia is a jewish orthodox boys' high school, educating students in grades 9-12 in torah and secular disciplines.
Education
10
Peoria Hebrew Day School
Private school with grades from Pre-School to 8th grade.
Education
11
Kohelet Yeshiva High School Inc
Kohelet yeshiva is a co-ed modern orthodox k-12 yeshiva day school serving the greater philadelphia region and outlying areas.
Education
12
Torah Center-Midwest Inc
To operate a Jewish School providing Jewish and secular education to boys and girls from preschool through the 8th grade.
—
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bais Yaakov High School of Chicago and the most unlike its peers is Hatzalah Chicago. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network
9 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Other$451,542Education$14,678Religion$10,084Recreation & Sports$7,280Health$4,444Human Services$1,708
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.
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.
Jewish Federation of MetropolitanIL24× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Jewish Federation of Metropolitan · Todd a and Raphaela Stern · Bitton Family Foundation Inc · Dennis and Joyce Ruben Foundation · Alice G Hanson Family Foundation · Yeshivas Kesser Yonah · Aj & Sl Stern Family Foundation · Walder Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Elliott and Ronni Charitable Fdn · Agudath Israel of Illinois · Menachem & Ahuva Shabat Family Foundation 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 organisation DANIEL & CHAYALA GLENNER 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.
2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: HATZALAH CHICAGO.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
low risk
~6 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 3.2× since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 271516477 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on HATZALAH CHICAGO, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 6 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 0% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Daniel & Chayala Glenner Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Daniel & Chayala Glenner Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines