How much does Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis Inc give?

Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis Inc reported 14 itemized grants totaling $22,207,608, out of $52,300,024 in total grant expense reported on the return in its FY2025 IRS filing. It funded between 15 and 16 organizations a year over FY2023 to FY2024.

What does Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis Inc fund?

By grant dollars over FY2023 to FY2025, its largest causes are International (67%), Religion (32%), Human Services (0%).

Who are Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis Inc's largest grantees?

By total granted over FY2023 to FY2025: Jewish Relief Network Ukraine ($29M), Jewish Community Center of Moscow ($8.9M), Jewish Institute of Queens ($3.4M).

Does Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis Inc fund new organizations?

In FY2024, 63% of the organizations it funded were first-time grantees.

Which funders back the same organizations as Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis Inc?

Its strongest co-funders, measured against what their size predicts, include Kolel Torah Inc, Jewish Communal Fund, Nash Charity Foundation Inc.

Where is Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis Inc based?

Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis Inc is based in NY.

Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis Inc

Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis Inc at a glance Mostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Community foundation

Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis Inc

To provide humanitarian aid and jewish education, organize and provide cultural events and religious services, and help develop jewish communities and rebuild jewish institutions, in russia, the former soviet union, and elsewhere.

$52M

Granted FY2025still arriving

Grants FY2025still arriving

States reached

$13M

Largest

01What it funds

01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2025.

International$29MReligion$14MHuman Services$124kEducation$25k

02FY2025 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured

The 14 grants below total $22,207,608, the rows itemized in this filing. The $52,300,024 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $30,092,416 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

Under $10k1 grant · $9k
$10k–50k6 grants · $178k
$50k–250k4 grants · $358k
$250k+3 grants · $22M

$60,000

Median grant

States reached

$66M

Total assets

Largest grants
Recipient	Amount
JEWISH RELIEF NETWORK UKRAINE	$13,101,000
WHITE FOREST JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER	$8,120,867
JEWISH INSTITUTE OF QUEENS	$442,165
CONGREGATION OHEL CHABAD LUBAVITCH	$114,972
YTTL LUBAVITCHER YESHIVA	$109,984
KOLEL TORAH INC	$72,555
FRIENDS OF CHABAD LUBAVITCH IN LUXEMBOURG	$60,000
COLEL CHABAD	$45,770
CHABAD OF CENTRAL OREGON	$40,000
UNITED LUBAVITCHER YESHIVA	$35,727
CHABAD LUBAVITCH OF GREATER GAINESVILLE	$20,000
JEWISH EDUCATIONAL MEDIA	$18,068
CHABAD JEWISH CENTER OF CRANBERRY AND BUTLER INC	$18,000
NORTH COUNTY CHABAD CENTER	$8,500

02The need

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 (FY23–23, $85k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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

Grants abroad, by region: $30M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 4 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Russia and Neighboring States$27M · 91% · 91 grants

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT

Middle East and North Africa$2.2M · 7% · 11 grants

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$575k · 2% · 11 grants

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT

South America$90k · 0% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.

03Its grantees

repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.

$42M · 10 repeat orgs$671k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +35% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$42M

$460k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+35%

Still filing today

20%

47%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $211k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

ReligionInternationalHuman ServicesEducationPhilanthropyOther

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

JR
JEWISH RELIEF NETWORK UKRAINE
3× · 2023–2025 · $29M · revenue +35% · 93% of their budget
JC
JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF MOSCOW
3× · 2023–2025 · $8.9M
JI
JEWISH INSTITUTE OF QUEENS
3× · 2023–2025 · $3.4M

Funded once

ML
MERKOS LINYONEI CHINUCH INC
one grant, 2024 · $102k
OA
OHR AVNER FOUNDATION INC
2× · 2023–2024 · $85k · revenue -100%
EJ
European Jewish Association Inc
one grant, 2023 · $58k · revenue 0%

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.

Eastern European Jewish Heritage Foundation

Philanthropy

Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel

Philanthropy

Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation

Philanthropy

Kedem for the Kiev Jewish Community

Provide support to the Jewish people of Ukraine by providing support to Jewish institutions in Ukraine.

Religion

Hayashar Vehatov Inc

The furtherance of primacy of orthodox jewish jurisprudence

Religion

Ohr Olam Corp

publish religious books

Religion

Friends of Yeshiva Beer Abraham

Furtherance of jewish education

Religion

Gemilas Chesed Kramer Inc

Philanthropy

Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion

American Friends of Zvi Latzadik Dba Breslov Research Institute Jerusalem

To foster jewish religious education and disseminate the teachings of rabbi nachman of breslov through publication and distribution of books and cds, as well as seminars, lectures and study groups.

International

American Friends of Oseh Chayil

To further jewish education in israel

Religion

Chabad Lametayel Inc

encourage and facilitate the observance of traditional orthodox Jewish practices around the world.

—

How this is measured

The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Vaad Hatmimim Haolami Inc; the most unlike its peers is Chabad of Argentina Relief Appeal. 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

10 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. 10 of the 30 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.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

10/10

Grantees still filing

3/10

Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

International$28,516,000Other$13,443,062Religion$192,071Human Services$85,000Education$39,288Philanthropy$24,650

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

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.

Kolel Torah IncNY26.2× affinity10 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Kolel Torah Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · Nash Charity Foundation Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Ojc Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2023

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

1get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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 Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis Inc?

Find your warmest path to Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis 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.

Play a game based on Federation of Jewish Communities of the Cis’ 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