Loading…
· Public charity
ELLEN E & VICTOR J COHN
Further the charitable, educational and religious purposes of the jewish federation of cleveland ("federation").
$377k
Granted FY2022
5
Grants
1
Communities
$182k
Largest
01What you fund
0177% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2019–2022.
Philanthropy$818kHealth$70kArts & Culture$30kEducation$30kReligion$6kOther$288k
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
2019
environmentlove learningmandelinspiresstudentsembraceexcellence
2020
endowment
2021
menorah parkinspiresstudents
2022
menorah parkinspiresstudents
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2022 · 5 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2022
- Under $10k2 grants · $14k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $28k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $182k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$973k
Total assets
Largest grants
- TEMPLE ISRAEL OF GREATER CLEVELAND$182,000
- HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE$18,000
- MENORAH PARK FOUNDATION$10,000
- MUSICAL ARTS ASSOCIATION$7,500
- OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION$6,000
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:
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 16% — the area typically sits at 10%. 100% of your 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.
05
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 6% of ELLEN E & VICTOR J COHN’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 99% of the giving stays in OH; read by stated purpose it is 57% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
ELLEN E & VICTOR J COHNlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 41% directed abroad (not shown)Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
81%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.0M · 5 repeat orgs$234k to everyone else
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +24% since the first grant, against -4% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2022, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
5
6
Total granted
$1.0M
$52k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+24%
-4%
Still filing today
100%
50%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2022, 19% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $182k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
PhilanthropyEducationHealthArts & CultureReligionOther
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
- HTHILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE3× · 2019–2022 · $72k · revenue +7%
- MPMENORAH PARK FOUNDATION3× · 2019–2022 · $70k · revenue +83%
- MAMUSICAL ARTS ASSOCIATION3× · 2019–2022 · $30k · revenue +24%
Funded once
- FOFRIENDS OF CHABAD LUBAVITCH SAN DIEGOone grant, 2019 · $18k
- GAGILMOUR ACADEMYone grant, 2019 · $10k
- FTFAIRMOUNT TEMPLE ANSHE CHESED CONGREGATIONone grant, 2019 · $7k
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
The Jewish Foundation of Cincinnati
Philanthropy
2
Jewish Federation of Cincinnati
The Jewish Federation of Cincinnati brings our community together to care for Jews.
Philanthropy
3
Foundation for Cincinnati Jewish Seniors
Health
4
Hebrew Academy of Cleveland
Academy offering a complete judaic & secular educational program from pre-k through high school.
—
5
Columbus Jewish Foundation
To ensure a supportive, engaged and vibrant future for the Jewish Community.
Philanthropy
6
The Mandel Jewish Community Center
The Mandel JCC strengthens the community through our robust programming, including arts & culture, senior adult, camp, and fitness offerings.
Human Services
7
University of Judaism Foundation
—
8
Hillel the Foundation of Jewish
Cincinnati Hillel enriches the lives and strengthens the Jewish identity of Jewish college students in Greater Cincinnati and builds bridges to Jewish life after college.
—
9
Cleveland Museum of Art
To provide a collection of artwork representing achievement of individuals and civilizations, past and present, for the benefit of the public.
Arts & Culture
10
Jsl Foundation
We nurture a sense of community and enrich the lives of older adults, while embracing jewish values and celebrating life.
Human Services
11
Jewish Community Center of Cincinnati
The Mayerson JCC provides cultural, social, educational and recreational programs to the Jewish Community and general community of Greater Cincinnati.
Recreation & Sports
12
The Laura and Alvin Siegal College of
To carry out the charitable, educational, and religious purposes of the jewish federation of cleveland by promoting high quality jewish life-long learning opportunities regarding the study of judaism spiritually, historically, culturally,…
Education
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Federation of Cleveland and the most unlike its peers is Ohio State University Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
06the grantee network
8 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2018–2025.
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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Philanthropy$818,000Other$288,200Health$70,000Arts & Culture$30,000Education$30,000Religion$6,000
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 JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND ↗
- Who funds HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE ↗
- Who funds MENORAH PARK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MUSICAL ARTS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GROSS SCHECTER DAY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF GREATER CLEVELAND ↗
- Who funds JOSEPH & FLORENCE MANDEL JEWISH DAY SCHOOL ↗
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 ClevelandOH18× affinity6 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Jewish Federation of Cleveland · David & Inez Myers Foundation · The Cleveland Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 ELLEN E & VICTOR J COHN 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 · 0–5%
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: HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
high risk
~2 months of operating runway; revenue held over 6 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
6 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 346557290 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 HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE, 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
- FlagFinancial stability— Roughly 2 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2023; revenue held over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 7% 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 Ellen E & Victor J Cohn?
Find your warmest path to Ellen E & Victor J Cohn 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