How much did JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND grant in FY2023?

Philanthropy$92MReligion$82MHuman Services$49MArts & Culture$42MHealth$35MEducation$31MInternational$8.9MFood & Nutrition$3.5MCivil Rights$3.1MOther$83M

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2019

anniversarykentkiddushtreeaatapropagatediabetes

2020

brandeiscoronavirus reliefmultiple sclerosissclerosis researchkimcha dpischacontinuationkitchen

2021

dickinsonlove learningpark seniorcampus fellowshipcharterjunesisters

2022

ukraine emergencyucsfrightparents circleemergency reliefgorillasgorilla

2023

legacy tuitionbuilding capitalscholarships tuitionequalitylgbtpihemergency relief

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2023 · 389 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2023

Under $10k97 grants · $680k
$10k–50k177 grants · $3.5M
$50k–250k77 grants · $8.9M
$250k+38 grants · $71M

$18,000

Median grant

States reached

$543M

Total assets

Largest grants

MENORAH PARK CENTER FOR SENIOR LIVING$16,843,362
JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC$16,362,762
JEWISH EDUCATION CENTER OF CLEVELAND$6,304,843
JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF CLEVELAND OHIO$4,759,882
MANDEL JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF CLEVELAND$4,123,440
HEBREW ACADEMY OF CLEVELAND$3,422,856
BELLEFAIRE JEWISH CHILDRENS BUREAU$1,240,521
ANTI DEFAMATION LEAGUE$1,104,785
UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS HEALTH SYSTEMS INC$1,022,257
NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RESEARCH ON SCHIZOPHRENIA & DEPRESSION$1,000,000
LIEBER INSTITUTE INC$1,000,000
YESHIVA DERECH HATORAH$952,638
PARK SYNAGOGUE$917,078
LEONARD AND SUSAN FUCHS MIZRACHI SCHOOL$840,856
JOSEPH AND FLORENCE MANDEL JEWISH DAY SCHOOL$839,848

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY18–23, $48.6M) land where the poverty rate runs at 17% — the area typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

Where the work is directed

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

About 10% of JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 68% of the giving stays in OH; read by stated purpose it is 65% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELANDlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address · 11% directed abroad (not shown)

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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$386M · 468 repeat orgs$43M to everyone else

468 repeat relationships — 320 still active in FY2023, 148 since wound down; 69 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

468

306

Total granted

$386M

$39M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+33%

+34%

Still filing today

79%

75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.6M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationArts & CultureHealthHuman ServicesInternationalReligionOther

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

JF
JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC
6× · 2018–2023 · $76M · revenue +6%
JE
JEWISH EDUCATION CENTER OF CLEVELAND
6× · 2018–2023 · $35M · revenue +79% · 76% of their budget
MP
MENORAH PARK CENTER FOR SENIOR LIVING
6× · 2018–2023 · $28M · revenue +11%

Funded once

IS
INTERNATIONAL SPY MUSEUM
one grant, 2018 · $24M · revenue -48% · 78% of their budget
NM
NEW MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ARTgraduated
one grant, 2018 · $4.1M · revenue +87%
JD
J DAVID AND REBECCA HELLER FAMILY FOUNDATION
one grant, 2021 · $2.6M · revenue -73% · 54% of their budget

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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 Contemporary Jewish Museum

Makes the diversity of jewish experience relevant through art & programs that challenge & inspire.

Arts & Culture

The Jewish Foundation of Cincinnati

Philanthropy

University of Judaism Foundation

—

United Jewish Foundation

The united jewish foundation serves as custodian of the detroit jewish community's assets. the foundation is committed to preserving and growing the assets to meet the community's long term needs.

Philanthropy

The Jewish Agency for Israel

The jewish agency binds jews across ideologies and civilizations together in a worldwide jewish family with israel at its center.it provides the global framework for aliyah, ensures global jewish safety, strengthens jewish identity and…

—

The Steinhardt Foundation for Jewish

Religion

American Friends of Israel Philharmonic Orchestra

To raise funds to support the operations and secure the israel philharmonic's financial future.

Arts & Culture

Clal-the National Jewish Center for

To bring jewish wisdom to the public to ensure a knowledgeable and involved jewish community

Religion

Hillel At the George Washington

Enriching the lives of jewish students.

—

Jewish Community Center of Cincinnati

The Mayerson JCC provides cultural, social, educational and recreational programs to the Jewish Community and general community of Greater Cincinnati.

Recreation & Sports

JewishColumbus

To Enrich Jewish Life & Instill Jewish Pride; Protect Our Community; Connect with Israel & World Jewry; Help Vulnerable Jewish Populations

Religion

The Jewish Community Center in

Creates opportunities to connect, grow and learn within an ever-changing jewish landscape.

Human Services

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Network of Jewish Human Service and the most unlike its peers is International Spy Museum. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 35 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) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.5% lost their exemption, against 9% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.5%4/843

the rest of the field

6,873/73,463

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.

06the grantee network

668 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

125

Early backer (in before they grew)

649/668

Grantees still filing

494/668

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Philanthropy$92,123,971Religion$81,926,087Other$98,517,688Human Services$49,225,458Arts & Culture$41,821,074Health$34,703,699Education$30,888,378

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.

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.

The Albert B & Audrey G RatnerOH143.9× affinity78 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Albert B & Audrey G Ratner · The Cleveland Foundation · The George Gund Foundation · Jack Joseph & Morton Mandel Foundation · David & Inez Myers Foundation · The Char and Chuck Fowler Family · National Society for Hebrew Day Schools · Richard Horvitz And · The Mt Sinai Health Care Foundation · John P Murphy Foundation · The Joseph and Florence Mandel Family- · Higley Fund of the Cleveland 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 organisation JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

4get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: TORAH YOUTH CENTER INC.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

high risk

3 years of Form 990 filings, no recent filing.

Legal standing

medium risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 471648128 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on TORAH YOUTH CENTER INC, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
FlagSustained operations— No recent filing on record.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 100% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Jewish Federation of Cleveland?

Find your warmest path to Jewish Federation of Cleveland through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

668 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Jewish Federation of Cleveland?

More from the funding graph

JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

668 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Jewish Federation of Cleveland?

More from the funding graph