· Private foundation
George & Adele Klein Family Foundation
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k13 grants · $51k
- $10k–50k19 grants · $329k
- $50k–250k6 grants · $527k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Mikvah Yisroel | $183,000 |
| The Altneu Synagogue | $110,000 |
| Performing Arts Center at the World Trade Center | $80,000 |
| FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH OF ISRAEL | $53,600 |
| Rabbinical College of Telshe | $50,000 |
| UJA Federation of NY | $50,000 |
| Agudath Israel of America | $45,000 |
| Jewish Policy Center | $25,000 |
| AMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK | $25,000 |
| museum of jewish heritage | $25,000 |
| Int'l Comm Of the Preservation of Har Hazeitim | $25,000 |
| Congregation BNAI Israel | $20,000 |
| Conference of Presidents | $18,000 |
| The Tikvah Fund | $18,000 |
| YESHIVA UNIVERSITY MUSEUM | $18,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY22–25, $17k) 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 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +14% since the first grant, against +1% for the ones you funded once.
69 repeat relationships — 28 still active in FY2025, 41 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
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 FY2025, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $403k 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
- ACAMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC7× · 2019–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +41%
- UJUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC6× · 2019–2025 · $691k · revenue +27%
- JAJEWISH AGENCY FOR ISRAEL - NORTH AMERICAN COUNCIL5× · 2018–2024 · $500k · revenue +28%
Funded once
- BMBETH MEDRASH GOVOHA OF LAKEWOOD INCone grant, 2019 · $180k · revenue +12%
- COCONGREGATION OHR YISROEL SADIGURAone grant, 2019 · $130k
- S1SEPTEMBER 11TH MEMORIAL & MUSEUMone grant, 2019 · $100k
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 further jewish education in israel
To promote, benefit, and support Jewish religious, charitable & educational activities in Israel and the USA.
To voluntarily assist the house of religious learning known as yeshiva neveh zion in israel
Religious School
To promote and foster the creation of a zionist intellectual infrastructure for the state of israel, the development of a jewish national culture, and the establishment and promotion of intellectual and economic liberty.
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.
To support religious, charitable, scientific, literary and/or educational programs
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Friends of Hebrew University Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Realty Foundation of New York Inc. 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 27 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
80 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. 80 of the 161 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 MUSEUM OF JEWISH HERITAGE A LIVING MEMORIAL TO THE HOLOCAUST ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds JEWISH AGENCY FOR ISRAEL - NORTH AMERICAN COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ISRAEL EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BEIT HATFUTSOT D/B/A AMERICAN FRIENDS OF ANU-MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds AGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BETH MEDRASH GOVOHA OF LAKEWOOD INC ↗
- Who funds Met Council Inc ↗
- Who funds BIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK CITY POLICE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF IR DAVID INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL JEWISH POLICY CENTER ↗
- Who funds YEDIDEI BEER YITZCHAK INC ↗
- Who funds RICHARD TUCKER MUSIC FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MORASHA OLAMI INC ↗
- Who funds TARGET ALS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds RABBINICAL COLLEGE OF TELSHE INC ↗
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: Jewish Communal Fund · The Ojc Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Metrowest NJ · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · Zichron Yechiel Mechel Foundation · Greater Miami Jewish Federation Inc · Fjc · Moise y Safra Foundation Inc · Nash Family 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 George & Adele Klein Family Foundation 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.
- Yeshiva Shaar Hatalmud — 6% 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 George & Adele Klein Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to George & Adele Klein Family Foundation 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.