· Private foundation
Georgejack & Joan Shuster Foundation Inc C/O Gail Norry
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
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 78% of GEORGEJACK & JOAN SHUSTER FOUNDATION INC C/O GAIL NORRY’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k15 grants · $22k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $27k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $170k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER PH | $169,700 |
| PRIZMAH CENTER FOR JEWISH DAY SCHOO | $16,000 |
| THE NAGEN PROJECT | $11,000 |
| SOUTH PHILADELPHIA SHTEIBEL | $6,100 |
| CAMP RANAH IN THE POCONOS | $5,000 |
| WJCS | $3,000 |
| JEWISH RELIEF AGENCY | $1,800 |
| DIRAH | $1,000 |
| OPENDOR MEDIA | $1,000 |
| OROT | $820 |
| TRIBE 12 | $613 |
| JEWISH LEARNING VENTURE | $540 |
| AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE | $500 |
| JUDITH CREED HORIZON FOR ACHIEVING | $500 |
| JEWISH WOMEN INTERNATIONAL | $500 |
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 (FY17–25, $32k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 2% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +35% since the first grant, against +32% for the ones you funded once.
41 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2025, 28 since wound down; 5 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, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k 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
- OOrot8× · 2017–2025 · $131k · revenue +30%
- PCPRIZMAH CENTER FOR JEWISH DAY SCHOOLS INC6× · 2017–2025 · $86k · revenue +13%
- CRCAMP RAMAH IN THE POCONOS5× · 2017–2025 · $40k · revenue +26%
Funded once
- JFJEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER PHILAone grant, 2017 · $73k
- JFJEWISH FEDERATION OF SOUTHERN NJone grant, 2017 · $25k
- PCPRIZMAH CENTER FOR JEWISH DAY SCHOOone grant, 2020 · $15k
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.
The university is composed of several colleges and schools providing undergraduate, graduate, professional and post-doctoral education and training and research and clinical programs.
Our vision is to develop ethical, impactful Jewish young adult leaders to ensure a vibrant Jewish community and make the world a better place. Our mission is to empower and engage Jewish young adults through leadership development and…
To prepare students for the rabbinate and to issue the traditional certificate of ordination in connection therewith. the seminary is authorized to confer the degree of master of hebrew literature (m.h.l.), doctor of hebrew literature…
Connect israel is a life-long program that aims to strengthen the gap between american jews and israelis through business, creative teamwork, and developing personal relationships.
Philadelphia jewish film and medias mission is to educate and engage diverse philadelphia communities, jewish and non-jewish alike, by presenting world-class film premieres, repertory cinema, and associated programs that are inspired by…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Prizmah Center for Jewish Day Schools Inc and the most unlike its peers is Orot. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 28 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 31% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 9% 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.
31 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. 31 of the 88 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 Orot ↗
- Who funds PRIZMAH CENTER FOR JEWISH DAY SCHOOLS INC ↗
- Who funds CAMP RAMAH IN THE POCONOS ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FUNDERS NETWORK ↗
- Who funds JEWISH RELIEF AGENCY ↗
- Who funds POLITZ DAY SCHOOL OF CHERRY HILL A NEW JERSEY NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds THE NAGEN PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds WESTCHESTER JEWISH COMMUNITY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds JEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC ↗
- Who funds KOHELET YESHIVA HIGH SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds BIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds 2164 INC ↗
- Who funds OPENDOR MEDIA INC ↗
- Who funds JACK M BARRACK HEBREW ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds JEWISH LEARNING VENTURE ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC ↗
- Who funds ISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE ↗
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: Katz Family Charitable Trust · The Saramar Charitable Fund · The Specter Foundation · Erlbaum Family Foundation · Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia · Jewish Communal Fund · Lasko Family Foundation · The Solomon & Sylvia Bronstein Fdn · Julius & Ray Charlestein Foundation · The Barrack Foundation · The Clayman Foundation · Covenant 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 Georgejack & Joan Shuster Foundation Inc C/O Gail Norry 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.
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.