Skip to content
Jewish Family and Children's Service of Pittsburgh at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Jewish Family and Children's Service of Pittsburgh

Jewish family and children's service supports people through life's changes and challenges while providing quality and affordable social services.

$3.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$398k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2025.

Human Services$4.4MEducation$2.0MReligion$1.1MYouth Development$135kCommunity Improvement$76kHealth$27kArts & Culture$12k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $1,713,828, the rows itemized in this filing. The $3,585,107 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,871,279 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $46k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $508k
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.2M
$125,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$30M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HELLO NEIGHBOR$397,940
AJAPO$389,532
LITERACY PITTSBURGH$372,345
BETHANY CHRISTIAN SERVICES$198,291
SOUTH HILLS INTERFAITH MOVEMENT$125,000
CASA SAN JOSE$111,417
ALLEGHENY INTERMEDIATE UNIT$73,778
PGH HISPANIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION$33,525
BCAP$12,000
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 (FY17–25, $2.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%HIAS: $10k → 22%CASA SAN JOSE: $112k → 11%CASA SAN JOSE: $111k → 11%HELLO NEIGHBOR: $398k → 11%NORTHERN AREA MULTI-SERVICE CENTER: $155k → 11%NORTHERN AREA MULTI-SERVICE CENTER: $152k → 11%AJAPO: $390k → 11%AJAPO: $389k → 11%AJAPO: $286k → 11%AJAPO: $189k → 11%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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$7.3M · 13 repeat orgs$473k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +41% since the first grant, against +41% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
4

Total granted

$7.3M
$63k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+41%
+41%

Still filing today

77%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $410k 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 ServicesEducationReligionArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • LP
    LITERACY PITTSBURGH
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.0M · revenue +208%
  • SH
    SOUTH HILLS INTERFAITH MINISTRIES
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +105%
  • NA
    NORTHERN AREA MULTI-SERVICE CENTER OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $307k · revenue +41%

Funded once

  • PH
    PGH HISPANIC DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY
    one grant, 2023 · $26k
  • AC
    AUTISM CONNECTION OF PAgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $15k · revenue +41%
  • GE
    GIANT EAGLE INC
    one grant, 2019 · $12k
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
World Affairs Council of Pittsburgh

The world affairs council of pittsburgh's mission is to convene and connect people around global issues to build a competitive, thriving, and inclusive pittsburgh.

International
2
Coalition of African Communities - Philadelphia Africom

To advocate and organize so that immigrants and refugees feel a sense of belonging and self-sufficiency. The mission is achieved by facilitating access to health and social services.

Community Improvement
3
Community Justice Project

To provide high quality civil legal assistance and other services to indigent individuals and families.

Crime & Legal
4
Welcome Project Pa

To serve and empower marginalized and vulnerable community members with support resources and social services.

Human Services
5
Asylee Women Enterprise Inc

Asylee Women Enterprise (AWE), journeys with asylum seekers and other forced migrants as they navigate the immigration legal process, begin to heal from past trauma, and rebuild their lives in Baltimore.

International
6
Pittsburgh Community Services Inc

Provide programs to help individuals and/or families achieve self-sufficiency.

Human Services
7
Ansar of Pittsburgh Corp

Providing social services and placement. Working with refugees and immigrant for placement and healthy transition into new communities

Human Services
8
Casa of Allegheny County

To recruit and train community members to advocate for the best interests of abused and neglected children.

Civil Rights
9
Nationalities Service Center of Philadelphia

To welcome and empower immigrants to thrive in our communities and pursue a just future.

Human Services
10
Global Solutions Pittsburgh

The global switchboard stewards a diverse network of people and organizations to promote equitable global engagement in the pittsburgh region. we strive to build a region where all people value diversity, practice empathy, and work…

International
11
The Public Interest Law Center

The Public Interest Law Center uses high-impact legal strategies to advance the civil, social, and economic rights of communities in the Philadelphia region facing discrimination, inequality, and poverty. We use litigation, community…

Crime & Legal
12
Pittsburgh United

Pittsburgh United, Inc. strives to advance social & economic justice in the

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bhutanese Community Association of Pittsburgh; the most unlike its peers is The Consortium for Public Education. 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

14 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. 14 of the 19 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
11/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ALLEGHENY INTERMEDIATE UNIT: $869,572 · OtherALLEGHENY INTERMEDIATE UNITSISTERS OF ST JOSEPH OF BADEN PENNSYLVANIA INC: $708,000 · OtherSISTERS OF ST JOSEPH OF BADEN PEN…BETHANY CHRISTIAN SERVICES: $293,023 · OtherBETHANY CHRISTIAN SERVICESNORTH HILLS COMMUNITY OUTREACH INC: $241,002 · OtherNORTH HILLS COMMUNITY OUTREACH IN…ALEPH INSTITUTE INC: $115,632 · Other+4 more: $76,815 · OtherACCULTURATION FOR JUSTICE ACCESS & PEACE OUTREACH: $1,254,082 · Human ServicesACCULTURATION FOR JUSTICE ACCES…HELLO NEIGHBOR: $397,940 · Human ServicesHELLO NEIGHBORNORTHERN AREA MULTI-SERVICE CENTER OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY INC: $306,752 · Human ServicesNORTHERN AREA MULTI-SERVICE CEN…CASA SAN JOSE: $222,982 · Human ServicesCASA SAN JOSE+1 more: $9,759 · Human ServicesLITERACY PITTSBURGH: $2,012,533 · EducationLITERACY PITTSBURGHALLIANCE FOR REFUGEE YOUTH SUPPORT AND EDUCATION: $110,693 · EducationSOUTH HILLS INTERFAITH MINISTRIES: $1,078,600 · ReligionSOUTH HILLS INT…Pittsburgh Hispanic Development Corporation: $75,900 · Community ImprovementBHUTANESE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION OF PITTSBURGH: $12,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$2,304,044Human Services$2,191,515Education$2,123,226Religion$1,078,600Community Improvement$75,900Arts & Culture$12,000

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 budgetLITERACY PITTSBURGH: $2,012,533 over 9y, 6.7% of budgetACCULTURATION FOR JUSTICE ACCESS & PEACE OUTREACH: $1,254,082 over 4y, 32% of budgetSOUTH HILLS INTERFAITH MINISTRIES: $1,078,600 over 9y, 5.4% of budgetHELLO NEIGHBOR: $397,940 over 1y, 6.1% of budgetBETHANY CHRISTIAN SERVICES: $293,023 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNORTH HILLS COMMUNITY OUTREACH INC: $241,002 over 7y, 1.4% of budgetCASA SAN JOSE: $222,982 over 2y, 5.1% of budgetALLIANCE FOR REFUGEE YOUTH SUPPORT AND EDUCATION: $110,693 over 5y, 11% of budgetPittsburgh Hispanic Development Corporation: $75,900 over 2y, 4.1% of budgetThe Consortium for Public Education: $24,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetAUTISM CONNECTION OF PA: $15,000 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetHIAS and Council Migration Service of Philadelphia Inc: $9,759 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

The Pittsburgh Founda…The United Way of Sou…The Heinz EndowmentsHillman Family Founda…The Grable FoundationRichard King Mellon F…Staunton Farm Foundat…Posner Foundation of …Jefferson Regional Fo…McElhattan FoundationThe Jack Buncher Foun…Eqt Foundation
The Pittsburgh FoundationPA32× affinity14 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Pittsburgh Foundation · The United Way of Southwestern Pennsylvania · The Heinz Endowments · Hillman Family Foundations · The Grable Foundation · Richard King Mellon Foundation · Staunton Farm Foundation 540-054 Dba Staunton Farm Foundation · Posner Foundation of Pittsburgh · Jefferson Regional Foundation · McElhattan Foundation · The Jack Buncher Foundation · Eqt 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 Jewish Family and Children's Service of Pittsburgh funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Jewish Family and Children's Service of Pittsburgh. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    11report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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 19 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 Family and Children's Service of Pittsburgh’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home