Skip to content
Feder Family Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Feder Family Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$31k
Granted FY2024still arriving
24
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$11k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0186% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Religion$70kRecreation & Sports$12kEducation$8kInternational$2kArts & Culture$1kHealth$909Human Services$860Housing & Shelter$500Other$0
02FY2024 · 24 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k23 grants · $21k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $11k
$600
Median grant
4
States reached
$416k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RIVERDALE JEWISH CENTER$10,500
CONGREGATION AISH KODESH$5,000
NJY CAMPS$3,600
WIZO$1,545
MESIVTA SHARRE CHAIM$1,000
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGALIM$1,000
YOUNG ISRAEL OF BAL HARBOUR$860
THE FRISCH SCHOOL$720
YAVNEH ACADEMY$700
AM ISRAEL EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION$700
WCS$650
UNITED JEWISH APPEAL$600
ORTHODOX UNION$600
SAR ACADEMY$500
Individual grant recipient$500
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:

Its human-services grants (FY20–24, $13k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%NJY CAMPS: $5k → 16%LA ARETZ: $250 → 20%NJY CAMPS: $4k → 16%NJY CAMPS: $4k → 16%PROJECT EZRA: $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.
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.

78%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$78k · 9 repeat orgs$23k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +511% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
18

Total granted

$78k
$15k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+511%
+13%

Still filing today

22%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 75% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesEducationHealthReligionFood & NutritionInternationalOther
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

  • RJ
    RIVERDALE JEWISH CENTER
    5× · 2020–2024 · $37k
  • NJ
    NEW JERSEY FEDERATION OF YOUNG MEN'S HEBREW ASSOCIATION AND YOUNG WOMEN'S
    3× · 2020–2024 · $12k · revenue +511%
  • CA
    CONGREGATION AISH KODESH
    2× · 2023–2024 · $10k

Funded once

  • YH
    YAVNEH HEBREW ACADEMY
    one grant, 2021 · $5k
  • CK
    CONGREGATION KETER TORAH
    one grant, 2021 · $3k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $1k
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
Sherit Isroel
—
2
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
3
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
4
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
5
Ezreinu Inc
Health
6
Ohr Meir Ubracha

The organization provides financial assistance to victims of acts of terrorism in the state of israel.

Philanthropy
7
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
8
American Friends of Neveh Zion

To voluntarily assist the house of religious learning known as yeshiva neveh zion in israel

Religion
9
American Friends of Oseh Chayil

To further jewish education in israel

Religion
10
American Friends of Ish El Rayahu

To promote, benefit, and support Jewish religious, charitable & educational activities in Israel and the USA.

Religion
11
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
12
Zicron Eliyahu Inc
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Emunah of America Inc; the most unlike its peers is Zichron Tzvi Elimelech. 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

14 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. 14 of the 42 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
7/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RIVERDALE JEWISH CENTER: $37,040 · OtherRIVERDALE JEWISH CENTERCONGREGATION AISH KODESH: $10,000 · OtherCONGREGATION AISH KODESHYOUNG ISRAEL OF BAL HARBOUR: $8,120 · OtherYOUNG ISRAEL OF BAL HARBOURMESIVTA SHAAREI CHAIM: $7,500 · OtherMESIVTA SHAAREI CHAIMYAVNEH HEBREW ACADEMY: $5,250 · OtherYAVNEH HEBREW ACADEMY+24 more: $16,674 · Other+24 moreNEW JERSEY FEDERATION OF YOUNG MEN'S HEBREW ASSOCIATION AND YOUNG WOMEN'S: $12,200 · Human ServicesNEW JERSEY FED…Project Ezra: $500 · Human Services+1 more: $250 · Human ServicesThe Frisch School: $900 · EducationBEN PORAT YOSEF INC: $300 · EducationKEREN OR INC: $159 · EducationNATIONAL JEWISH OUTREACH PROGRAM IN: $600 · ReligionKESHER FAMILIES INC: $360 · ReligionSharsheret Inc: $500 · HealthTHE ELLIE RUBY FOUNDATION INC: $250 · HealthGREATER MIAMI JEWISH FEDERATION INC: $500 · PhilanthropyACHI613 INC: $200 · Food & NutritionEMUNAH OF AMERICA INC: $180 · International
Other$84,584Human Services$12,950Education$1,359Religion$960Health$750Philanthropy$500Food & Nutrition$200International$180

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNEW JERSEY FEDERATION OF YOUNG MEN'S HEBREW ASSOCIATION AND YOUNG WOMEN'S: $12,200 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetThe Frisch School: $900 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL JEWISH OUTREACH PROGRAM IN: $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER MIAMI JEWISH FEDERATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetProject Ezra: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSharsheret Inc: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetZICHRON TZVI ELIMELECH: $360 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKESHER FAMILIES INC: $360 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBEN PORAT YOSEF INC: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLA-ARETZ: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ELLIE RUBY FOUNDATION INC: $250 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetACHI613 INC: $200 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetEMUNAH OF AMERICA INC: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKEREN OR INC: $159 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.

  • Who funds NEW JERSEY FEDERATION OF YOUNG MEN'S HEBREW ASSOCIATION AND YOUNG WOMEN'S ↗
  • Who funds The Frisch School ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL JEWISH OUTREACH PROGRAM IN ↗
  • Who funds GREATER MIAMI JEWISH FEDERATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Project Ezra ↗
  • Who funds Sharsheret Inc ↗
  • Who funds ZICHRON TZVI ELIMELECH ↗
  • Who funds KESHER FAMILIES INC ↗
  • Who funds BEN PORAT YOSEF INC ↗
  • Who funds LA-ARETZ ↗
  • Who funds THE ELLIE RUBY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds ACHI613 INC ↗
  • Who funds EMUNAH OF AMERICA INC ↗

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.

Jewish Communal FundThe J W FoundationJewish Federation of …Cross River Community…FjcRuth R Greenberg Fami…The Daniel E and Joyc…David & Esther Musche…F G FoundationThe Kahan Family Foun…Astar Foundation IncThe Jmg Foundation
Jewish Communal FundNY27.3× affinity14 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · The J W Foundation · Jewish Federation of Northern New Jersey Inc · Cross River Community Foundation · Fjc · Ruth R Greenberg Family Foundation · The Daniel E and Joyce G Straus Family Foundation · David & Esther Muschel Foundation · F G Foundation · The Kahan Family Foundation · Astar Foundation Inc · The Jmg 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 Feder Family Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Feder Family Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 4%
  • Sharsheret Inc: 4% of income from government
  • The Frisch School: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Feder Family Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Feder Family Foundation Inc 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.

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 42 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Feder Family’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