· Private foundation
Isadore & Yetta Joshowitz Charitable 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
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 84% of ISADORE & YETTA JOSHOWITZ CHARITABLE FOUNDATION’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 $10k76 grants · $51k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $38k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $61k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| JEWISH FEDERATION OF GTR PGH | $60,500 |
| KOLLEL BAIS YITZCHOK (KOLLEL JEWISH LEARNING CENTER) | $16,000 |
| HILLEL ACADEMY OF PITTSBURGH | $11,950 |
| MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION | $10,000 |
| YESHIVA SCHOOLS | $5,000 |
| CONGREGATION POALE ZEDECK | $2,600 |
| BANOT SHERUT OF PITTSBURGH | $2,500 |
| YESHIVA UNIVERSITY | $2,000 |
| YOUNG ISREAL OF PITTSBURGH | $2,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,000 |
| PADRES INSTITUTE OF JEWISH STUDIES | $2,000 |
| CAMP STONE | $2,000 |
| SHAARE TORAH | $2,000 |
| HILLEL INTERNATIONAL | $1,700 |
| YESIVA NACHLEI TORAH | $1,500 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY21–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 97% of your 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.
90 repeat relationships — 69 still active in FY2025, 21 since wound down; 11 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, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k 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
- HAHILLEL ACADEMY OF PITTSBURGH5× · 2021–2025 · $60k · revenue +14%
- YUYESHIVA UNIVERSITY5× · 2021–2025 · $10k · revenue +25%
HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE5× · 2021–2025 · $9k · revenue +56%
Funded once
- JFJOSHOWITZ FAMILY FUND GEMILAS CHESEDone grant, 2021 · $20k
- GCGEMILAS CHESSED JOSHOWTIZ FAMILY FUNDone grant, 2022 · $12k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2021 · $10k
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 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…
The school trains advanced talmudic scholars, enabling them to become high level teachers and religious leaders in israel and the united states using specific methodology combining traditional talmudic study with innovative learning…
Religious School
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hillel Jewish University Center and the most unlike its peers is Reading Ready Pittsburgh. 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 34 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) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
46 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. 46 of the 151 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 HILLEL ACADEMY OF PITTSBURGH ↗
- Who funds YESHIVATH ACHEI TMIMIM OF PITTSBURGH ↗
- Who funds MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE ↗
- Who funds PARDES INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds Braddock Carnegie Library Assoc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET ISRAEL INC ↗
- Who funds HEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION OF PITTSBURGH ↗
- Who funds ONE ISRAEL FUND LTD ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF YAD SARAH INC ↗
- Who funds Pittsburgh Kollel Bais Yitzchok ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF NACHLAS ZVI ↗
- Who funds HILLEL JEWISH UNIVERSITY CENTER ↗
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 Federation of Greater Pittsburgh · The Pittsburgh Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Tzedakah Foundation · David S Shapira Foundation · The Jack Buncher Foundation · Morris Charles M Tr Ua-Char · The Fine Foundation · Richard and Dana Green Philanthropic Foundation · Giant Eagle Foundation · Hillman Family Foundations · Fourteen Ten 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 Isadore & Yetta Joshowitz Charitable 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 Nachlei Torah Inc — 9% of income from government
- Kollel of Greater Boston Inc — 4% 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.