Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Five C Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$155k
Granted FY2025still arriving
22
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$30k
Largest
01What you fund
0173% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Religion$80kCivil Rights$30kInternational$20kEducation$10kHuman Services$10kPhilanthropy$3kFood & Nutrition$1kRecreation & Sports$500Other$0
02FY2025 · 22 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k16 grants · $50k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $105k
$5,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$512k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CLARION PROJECT INC$30,000
AM YISRAEL CHAI FOUNDATION INC$25,000
FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES$15,000
MERKOS LINYOUNEI CHINUCH LUBAVITCH OF INDIANA INC$15,000
CHICAGO CHESED FUND$10,000
OPENDOR MEDIA INC$10,000
CONGREGATION OR TORAH$7,465
GREEN ROAD SYNAGOGUE$6,870
PROJECT 613 NFP$5,000
UNITED NATIONS WATCH USA$5,000
JET-JEWISH EDUCATIONAL TEAM INC$5,000
JEM FOUNDATION INC$4,000
CHABAD LUBAVITCH ON CAMPUS-PRINCETON$3,600
J-GIVE-FRIENDS OF ASOR FUND USA INC$2,500
HASTEN HEBREW ACADEMY OF INDIANAPOLIS$2,500
02The need
03

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:

Your human-services grants (FY25–25, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CHICAGO CHESED FUND: $10k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

Which US states your grants reach

IL
NY
IN
OH
NJ
CA
TX
FL

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.

03Your 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
University of Judaism Foundation
2
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
3
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
4
American Friends of Yeshivat Hakotel Inc

To support religious, charitable, scientific, literary and/or educational programs

Education
5
Friends of Yeshiva Tehilas Shlomo Inc

Provide support to further jewish education

Philanthropy
6
Fund for Jewish Education Inc
Philanthropy
7
Friends of Yeshiva Beer Abraham

Furtherance of jewish education

Religion
8
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
9
American Friends of Oseh Chayil

To further jewish education in israel

Religion
10
Foundation for Jewish Renaissance I

To strengthen the connection between jewish people and their faith, traditions and homeland

Religion
11
Kehillah Jewish Education Fund

Make an authentic jewish education, coupled with an excellent secular education, available and affordable to all jewish families in the chicagoland community.

Education
12
Eastern European Jewish Heritage Foundation
Philanthropy

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Opendor Media Inc and the most unlike its peers is Friends of the Israel Defense Forces. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 32 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number18%10%<5yr12%10%5–10yr21%20%10–20yr14%20%20–35yr16%35%35–55yr20%5%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value18%1%<5yr12%6%5–10yr21%33%10–20yr14%21%20–35yr16%35%35–55yr20%5%55yr+

The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 10% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/20
the rest of the field
11%
8,037/74,286

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

04the grantee network

11 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 11 of the 24 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

DETAIL AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST — $1,053,877 · OtherDETAIL AVAILABLE UPON REQUESTDETAIL PROVIDED UPON REQUEST — $584,789 · OtherDETAIL PROVIDED UPON REQUEST+11 more — $28,073 · OtherMERKOS L INYOUNEI CHINUCH LUBAVITCH OF INDIANA INC — $15,000 · ReligionOPENDOR MEDIA INC — $10,000 · ReligionJET - JEWISH EDUCATION TEAM INC — $5,000 · ReligionJEM FOUNDATION INC — $4,000 · ReligionHasten Hebrew Academy of Indianapolis — $2,500 · ReligionCLARION PROJECT INC — $30,000 · Arts & CultureAM YISRAEL CHAI FOUNDATION INC — $25,000 · EducationPROJECT 613 NFP — $5,000 · EducationFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES — $15,000 · InternationalCHICAGO CHESED FUND — $10,000 · Human ServicesUNITED NATIONS WATCH - USA — $5,000 · Civil Rights
Other$1,666,739Religion$36,500Arts & Culture$30,000Education$30,000International$15,000Human Services$10,000Civil Rights$5,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ your share of their budget
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 CLARION PROJECT INC
  • Who funds AM YISRAEL CHAI FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES
  • Who funds MERKOS L INYOUNEI CHINUCH LUBAVITCH OF INDIANA INC
  • Who funds OPENDOR MEDIA INC
  • Who funds CHICAGO CHESED FUND
  • Who funds PROJECT 613 NFP
  • Who funds UNITED NATIONS WATCH - USA
  • Who funds JET - JEWISH EDUCATION TEAM INC
  • Who funds JEM FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds Hasten Hebrew Academy of Indianapolis

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 Communal FundNY15.5× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Jewish Federation of Cleveland · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · Todd a and Raphaela Stern Family Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · National Philanthropic Trust · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Endowment 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 organization Five C Foundation Inc 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
2021222324
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY2024

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 24 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph