Skip to content
Diamond Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Diamond Foundation

Its FY2021 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$37k
Granted FY2019
13
Grants FY2019
4
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of Diamond Foundation’s FY2021 grant dollars went to Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2021 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2019, the last year Diamond Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 7 organizations, $37k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

5
’18
7
’19
3
’20
0
’21

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2021.

Philanthropy$1.0MReligion$31kEducation$15kHuman Services$6kInternational$5kCommunity Improvement$5kHealth$3kFood & Nutrition$250Other$0
02FY2019 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2019

  • Under $10k12 grants · $23k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
$500
Median grant
4
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CONGREGATION B'NAI ISRAEL$14,500
IPTF$8,500
OAK HILL SCHOOL$5,000
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM$5,000
JEWISH COUNCIL OF NORTH CENTRAL FLORIDA$1,000
YM-YMHA OF UNION COUNTY$750
TEMPLE SHIR SHALOM$500
THE TORAH FUND$500
ST JUDES CHILDRENS HOSPITAL$500
HILLEL OF BROWARD AND PALM BEACH$418
BREAD OF THE MIGHTY FOOD BANK$250
FAMILY PROMISE$250
TEMPLE BETH EL$200
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY18–20) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 59% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%LOWN CARDIOVASCULAR RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $100 → 7%CONGREGATION B'NAI ISRAEL: $15k → 11%STAND WITH US: $100 → 14%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $5k → 17%UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MUSEUM: $50 → 14%TEMPLE BETH EL: $200 → 10%JEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY: $5k → 11%BREAD OF THE MIGHTY FOOD BANK: $250 → 19%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $3k → 5%YM-YMHA OF UNION COUNTY: $1k → 10%DIASBLED AMERICAN VETERANS: $150 → 10%CONGREGATION B'NAI ISRAEL: $6k → 11%IPTF: $9k → 17%STAND AMONG FRIENDS: $3k → 11%OAK HILL SCHOOL: $5k → 19%YM-YMHA OF UNION COUNTY: $1k → 10%CONGREGATION B'NAI ISRAEL: $5k → 11%THE TORAH FUND: $2k → 17%HILLEL OF BROWARD AND PALM BEACH: $418 → 11%OAK HALL SCHOOL: $5k → 19%YM-YMHA OF UNION COUNTY: $750 → 10%THE TORAH FUND: $500 → 17%HILLEL OF BROWARD AND PALM BEACH: $418 → 11%OAK HILL SCHOOL: $5k → 19%FAMILY PROMISE: $250 → 10%THE TORAH FUND: $180 → 17%CHABAD: $300 → 11%NEIGHBORHOODS UNITED FOR A BETTER ALACHUA: $5k → 19%JEWISH FEDERATION OF CENTRAL NJ: $150 → 10%ST JUDES CHILDRENS HOSPITAL: $500 → 17%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.

Which US states its grants reach

NY
MA
OH
NJ
CA
KY
VA
DC
FL
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.

58%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$43k · 6 repeat orgs$32k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +268% since the first grant, against +91% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2019, 0 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call). Read against FY2019, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
8

Total granted

$43k
$6k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+268%
+91%

Still filing today

33%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 58% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20
InternationalArts & CultureReligionHousing & ShelterHealthOther
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

  • CB
    CONGREGATION BNAI ISRAEL
    3× · 2018–2020 · $26k
  • OH
    OAK HILL SCHOOL
    2× · 2019–2020 · $10k
  • YO
    YM-YWHA OF UNION COUNTY
    3× · 2018–2020 · $3k · revenue -23%

Funded once

  • OH
    OAK HALL SCHOOL
    one grant, 2018 · $5k
  • C
    CHABAD
    one grant, 2018 · $300
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $150
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
The Jewish Federation of Sarasota-Manatee Inc

To strengthen jewish life and identity in our community, provide for jewish people in need and promote support for israel.

Philanthropy
2
Hillel At Florida International University

Enrich the lives of jewish students

—
3
Gainesville Jewish Student Foundation Inc

The gainesville jewish student foundation, inc. (known as schilit hillel at uf) mission: schilit hillel at uf enriches the lives of jewish students, inspiring them to make an enduring commitment to jewish life, learning, and israel

—
4
University of Judaism Foundation
—
5
Delegation of Jewish American Students (Dojas)
—
6
Foundation for Conservative Judiasm of South Florida
—
7
Eastern European Jewish Heritage Foundation
Philanthropy
8
Greater Miami Hillel Foundation Inc

The mission of the organization is to enrich the lives of jewish undergraduate and graduate students so that they may enrich the jewish people and the world.

—
9
The Jewish Museum

The mission of the jewish museum is to collect, preserve, exhibit and interpret art and jewish culture. see schedule o for more information.

Arts & Culture
10
Maimonides Fellowships Florida Corp

Religious outreach

Education
11
National Council of Jewish Women Inc Jersey Hills Section
—
12
Jewish Heritage Festival Inc

To produce a bi-annual cultural festival which is free and open to the public. 2025 is an off year, the next festival will be held in 2026.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Federation of Palm Beach County Inc; the most unlike its peers is The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. 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

11 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. 11 of the 26 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
7/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $1,024,596 · Community ImprovementFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUNDCONGREGATION BNAI ISRAEL: $25,800 · OtherOAK HILL SCHOOL: $10,000 · OtherIPTF: $8,500 · OtherNEIGHBORHOODS UNITED FOR A BETTER ALACHUA: $5,000 · OtherOAK HALL SCHOOL: $5,000 · OtherYM-YWHA OF UNION COUNTY: $3,000 · OtherTHE TORAH FUND: $2,680 · OtherJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $2,500 · Other+10 more: $3,511 · OtherAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $5,000 · International+1 more: $100 · InternationalJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INC: $5,000 · PhilanthropySTAND AMONG FRIENDS INC: $2,500 · HealthJewish Council of North Central Florida: $1,000 · ReligionFAMILY PROMISE INC: $250 · Housing & ShelterThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $50 · Arts & Culture
Community Improvement$1,024,596Other$65,991International$5,100Philanthropy$5,000Health$2,500Religion$1,000Housing & Shelter$250Arts & Culture$50

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 budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $1,024,596 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYM-YWHA OF UNION COUNTY: $3,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetSTAND AMONG FRIENDS INC: $2,500 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetJewish Council of North Central Florida: $1,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetHILLEL OF BROWARD AND PALM BEACH INC: $836 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBREAD OF THE MIGHTY FOOD BANK INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFAMILY PROMISE INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $50 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.

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.

Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA6.1× affinity6 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Diamond Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Diamond Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Family Promise Inc: 2% of income from government
  • Ym-Ywha of Union County: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get 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 · 0–15%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
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.

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 26 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 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Diamond’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