· Private foundation
Elie and Tina Levy Charitable Foundation Inc D/B/A Spark of Giving
Its FY2023 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 94% of ELIE AND TINA LEVY CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC D/B/A SPARK OF GIVING’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2023
- $10k–50k3 grants · $63k
- $250k+1 grant · $427k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| VARIOUS LESS THAN 2 | $426,906 |
| ATERET TORAH CENTER | $27,500 |
| YESHIVAT HECHAL SHEMUEL | $22,000 |
| BET MEDRASH GADOL ATERET TORAH | $13,000 |
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 19%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 92% 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.
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.
14 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2023, 10 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- BFBABBITT FAMILY CHARITABLE TRUST7× · 2017–2023 · $2.0M · revenue +604% · 100% of their budget
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BINYAN-AV FOUNDATION5× · 2017–2022 · $89k · revenue +110%
- LCLAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC4× · 2017–2020 · $38k · revenue +48%
Funded once
- AEAHI EZER YESHIVA INCone grant, 2021 · $25k
- ELEZRA LEVY AND FAMILY CHARITY FUNDone grant, 2018 · $20k
- STSHEPHARDIC TORAH CENTER KOLLELone grant, 2021 · $18k
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 operate a religious school for high school and post high school students.
Maintain communal and charitable affairs in accordance with the tradition of the orthodox jewish faith
A school-section 170(b)(1)(a)(ii), operating from the preschool pre-k level through high school, and chartered ny the new york state education department and board of regents.
Religious Teaching
Providing jewish and secular education for high school aged girls.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Yeshiva Keter Torah Inc and the most unlike its peers is American Friends of Binyan-Av Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
8 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. 8 of the 25 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 BABBITT FAMILY CHARITABLE TRUST ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BINYAN-AV FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds ILAN HIGH SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA KETER TORAH INC ↗
- Who funds Yeshivat Lev Torah ↗
- Who funds KEREN EZER LNEFESH ↗
- Who funds HACHAM BARUCH MEMORIAL FOUNDATION I ↗
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: Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · Marbeh Shalom Foundation Inc · The Jimmy and Berta Khezrie Charitable Foundation · The Setton Foundation · Ray & Sharon Haber Foundation Inc · Mary & Abe Sutton Foundation · The Howard Hoffman & Sons Foundation Inc · The Amin and Lillian Adjmi Foundation · Ralph J Harary Foundation Inc · Cabasso Family Foundation · The Adjmi-Dwek 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 organization Elie and Tina Levy Charitable Foundation Inc D/B/A Spark of Giving 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Yeshiva Keter Torah Inc — 8% 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 Elie and Tina Levy Charitable Foundation Inc D/B/A Spark of Giving?
Find your warmest path to Elie and Tina Levy Charitable Foundation Inc D/B/A Spark of Giving 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.