Skip to content

· Private foundation

Herbert & Betty Bloom 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.

$10k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Religion$42kPhilanthropy$28kHuman Services$8kHealth$3kEducation$2kAnimals$170Arts & Culture$85Other$0
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$895
Median grant
4
States reached
$114k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TEMPLE SHIR SHALOM$5,390
JEWISH WOMEN OF ATLANTA$1,250
JEWISH FEDRATION OF METROPOLITAN DETROIT$1,250
ST JOHNS EMERGECNCY RESIDENTS FUND$1,000
NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN$895
ST JOHNS RESIDENCY FUND$300
JEWISH NEWS FOUNDATION$85
BOYS TOWN$25
ST JUDE$25
Individual grant recipient$25
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 (FY18–25, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 51% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%BOYS TOWN: $25 → 12%STARFISH FAMILY SERVICES: $1k → 21%JARC: $1k → 8%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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$71k · 7 repeat orgs$11k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +130% since the first grant, against +17% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
11

Total granted

$71k
$9k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+130%
+17%

Still filing today

29%
36%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesAnimalsEducationCommunity ImprovementArts & CultureOther
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

  • TS
    TEMPLE SHIR SHALOM
    8× · 2018–2025 · $37k
  • JF
    JEWISH FEDRATION OF METROPOLITAN DETROIT
    7× · 2019–2025 · $14k
  • JF
    JEWISH FEDERATION
    2× · 2017–2018 · $12k

Funded once

  • TK
    TEMPLE KOL AMI
    one grant, 2017 · $4k
  • HD
    HILLEL DAY SCHOOL OF METRO DETROIT
    one grant, 2019 · $2k · revenue +17%
  • SF
    STARFISH FAMILY SERVICES INC
    one grant, 2019 · $1k · revenue +2%
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
The Jewish Fund

The jewish fund is organized and operates exclusively for charitable, educational, and religious purposes. the fund's primary activities are: supporting a jewish health care mission in the greater detroit area and michigan; promotion of…

Philanthropy
2
Hillel of Metropolitan Detroit

Inspire students to be active in jewish life.

Education
3
Jewish Federation of Detroit

The jewish federation of detroit is the cornerstone of our jewish community. we are committed to taking care of the needs of the jewish people and building a strong and vibrant jewish future, in detroit, in israel and around the world.

Philanthropy
4
Jewish Home Services Inc

Jewish senior life of metropolitan detroit is dedicated to enhancing the quality of life for older adults of the metropolitan detroit jewish community through the provision of personalized high quality programs and services that support…

Human Services
5
Jewish Historical Society of Michigan

Jewish historical society of michigan shares and celebrates the experiences and contributions of the jewish people, communities and institutions of michigan.

—
6
Jewish Home and Aging Services

We nurture a sense of community and enrich the lives of older adults, while embracing jewish values and celebrating life.

—
7
United Jewish Foundation

The united jewish foundation of detroit owns, manages and invests jewish communal assets, including general and endowment funds, agency endowments, supporting foundations and real property. the foundation is committed to ensuring that…

Philanthropy
8
Milwaukee Jewish Day School Inc

Where academic excellence and jewish values prepare children for a lifetime of success, leadership and engagement with the world.

—
9
Jewish Community Center of Metropolitan Detroit

The mission of the jewish community center of metropolitan detroit is to build a dynamic jewish community by collaborating to createworld-class education and engagement opportunities for the mind, body and soul throughout metro detroit.

Human Services
10
Jewish Federation of Greater Ann Arbor

The federation provides and inspires philanthropic leadership and community-building to nurture a strong, engaged, connected, vibrant, and enduring jewish community locally, in israel, and around the world.

Philanthropy
11
Detroit Jews for Justice

Djj advances racial and economic justice by developing metro detroit jews as community organizers who fight for transformative policy change in deep partnership with neighbors

Civil Rights
12
Jas Non-Profit Housing Corporation Vi

We nurture a sense of community and enrich the lives of older adults, while embracing jewish values and celebrating life.

Housing & Shelter
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Michigan Humane Society; the most unlike its peers is Father Flanagan's Boys' Home. 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

9 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. 9 of the 25 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
8/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TEMPLE SHIR SHALOM: $36,712 · OtherTEMPLE SHIR SHALOMJEWISH FEDRATION OF METROPOLITAN DETROIT: $13,650 · OtherJEWISH FEDRATION OF METROPOLITAN DETROITJEWISH FEDERATION: $12,450 · OtherJEWISH FEDERATIONTEMPLE KOL AMI: $3,890 · OtherTEMPLE KOL AMI+12 more: $5,475 · Other+12 moreNATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN MICHIG: $5,641 · Community ImprovementNATIONAL …FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $1,700 · Community ImprovementFIDELITY …STARFISH FAMILY SERVICES INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesJARC: $1,000 · Human Services+1 more: $25 · Human ServicesHILLEL DAY SCHOOL OF METRO DETROIT: $1,800 · EducationHEART OF MICHIGAN BERNESE MOUNTAIN DOG RESCUE: $100 · AnimalsMICHIGAN HUMANE SOCIETY: $70 · AnimalsTHE DETROIT JEWISH NEWS FOUNDATION INC: $85 · Arts & Culture
Other$72,177Community Improvement$7,341Human Services$2,025Education$1,800Animals$170Arts & Culture$85

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN MICHIG: $5,641 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetHILLEL DAY SCHOOL OF METRO DETROIT: $1,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $1,700 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSTARFISH FAMILY SERVICES INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJARC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHEART OF MICHIGAN BERNESE MOUNTAIN DOG RESCUE: $100 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMICHIGAN HUMANE SOCIETY: $70 over 3y, 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 NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN MICHIG ↗
  • Who funds HILLEL DAY SCHOOL OF METRO DETROIT ↗
  • Who funds FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND ↗
  • Who funds STARFISH FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds JARC ↗
  • Who funds HEART OF MICHIGAN BERNESE MOUNTAIN DOG RESCUE ↗
  • Who funds THE DETROIT JEWISH NEWS FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds MICHIGAN HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds Father Flanagan's Boys' Home ↗

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.

The Sherman Family FoundationMI13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Sherman Family Foundation · Grosfeld Foundation · The Andrea and Lawrence Wolfe Family Foundation · Harold and Penny B Blumenstein Foundation Corporation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Herbert & Betty Bloom Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Herbert & Betty Bloom Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%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 · 0–75%
    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 Herbert & Betty Bloom Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Herbert & Betty Bloom 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.

    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 25 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Herbert & Betty Bloom’s filings →

    More from the funding graph