Skip to content

· Public charity

Jewish Community Center of Greater Kansas City

To build a strong, vibrant, and inclusive community that enhances wellness, meaning, and joy, based on jewish values, heritage, and culture.

$1.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$1.4M
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Crime & Legal$8.1MPhilanthropy$731kReligion$162kHuman Services$111kCivil Rights$10k
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $47k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.4M
$50,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$18M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER CHARITABLE SUPPORTING FOUNDATION$1,355,000
GREATER KANSAS CITY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION - REAT GRIFFIN UNDERWOOD DAF$50,000
JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER KANSAS CITY$46,823
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 (FY21–21, $111k) land where the poverty rate runs at 5%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%JEWISH COMMUNITY CAMPUS OF GREATER KANSAS CITY: $101k → 5%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $10k → 5%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 9% of Jewish Community Center of Greater Kansas City’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Jewish Community Center of Greater Kansas Citylessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
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
Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Kansas City

The mission of the jewish community foundation of greater kansas city is to promote the practice of tzedakah (righteousness, charity) and the pursuit of tikkun olam (repairing the world) by serving as the central resource and advocate for…

Philanthropy
2
Mid-Kansas Jewish Federation Inc

Build, strengthen, and preserve jewish identity within the local community, in israel, and around the world through tzedakah, education, and cultural events.

Religion
3
Vaad Hakashruth of Kansas City Inc

To provide proper supervison of kosher foods for the kansas city jewish community & assure that products are prepared in accordance with jewish law.

Religion
4
Community Kollel of Kansas City Inc

The Kollels purpose is to provide Jewish education and to encourage, supervise and enlightenpeople in Jewish texts, culture and knowledge.

Religion
5
Jewish Federation of Nashville and Middle Tennessee

The jewish federation of nashville is the central voluntary communal organization of the jewish community. through its fund-raising, planning and community relations efforts, either independently or in partnership with other jewish…

Philanthropy
6
Lowenstein Family Supporting Foundation

The organization is designed to provide support for other charitable organizations as described in section 501(c) and sections 509(a) of the internal revenue code. the organization is exclusively for charitable, educational, or religious…

Philanthropy
7
Jewish Community Centers Association of North America

Jcc association strengthens jewish life in north america through direct service to affiliate jccs, ym-ywha's and camps and by providing leadership and guidance to the jcc movement. in addition, we serve jewish personnel in the armed forces…

Human Services
8
Jewish Communal Fund

To facilitate and promote philanthropy through donor advised funds.

Philanthropy
9
Menorah Heritage Foundation

The organization is designed to provide support for other charitable organizations as described in sections 501(c)(3) and 509(a) of the internal revenue code. the organization is operated exclusively for charitable, educational or…

Philanthropy
10
Jewish Foundation of Greater New Haven Inc

The jewish foundation of greater new haven's mission is to solicit and properly manage current and new charitable endowments and planned gifts for organizations in greater new haven so that there will be permanent and ongoing funding for…

Religion
11
University of Judaism Foundation
—
12
Jewish Federation of Grand Rapids

The jewish federation of grand rapids strengthens and unifies the jewish community and functions as an umbrella organization to provide for the cultural, social and financial needs of our community, world jewry and the state of israel.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Federation of Greater Kansas City; the most unlike its peers is Sevendays Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

8 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER CHARITABLE SUPPORTING FOUNDATION: $9,472,567 · Crime & LegalJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER CHARITABLE SUPPORTING FOUNDATIONGreater Kansas City Community Foundation: $450,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER KANSAS CITY: $367,765 · Philanthropy+1 more: $10,000 · PhilanthropyHILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $161,811 · OtherJEWISH COMMUNITY CAMPUS OF GREATER KANSAS CITY INC: $100,640 · Human ServicesJEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $10,000 · Human ServicesSEVENDAYS INC: $10,000 · Religion
Crime & Legal$9,472,567Philanthropy$827,765Other$161,811Human Services$110,640Religion$10,000

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 budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER CHARITABLE SUPPORTING FOUNDATION: $9,472,567 over 9y, 71% of budgetGreater Kansas City Community Foundation: $450,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER KANSAS CITY: $367,765 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetHILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $161,811 over 1y, 29% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY CAMPUS OF GREATER KANSAS CITY INC: $100,640 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetNEMA FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSEVENDAYS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

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.

Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Kansas CityKS15.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Kansas City · Greater Kansas City Community Foundation · White Family Supporting Foundation · Menorah Heritage Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 Jewish Community Center of Greater Kansas City funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Jewish Community Center of Greater Kansas City. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%funder's 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, 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.

    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 8 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 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 Jewish Community Center of Greater Kansas City’s filings →

    More from the funding graph