· Public charity
Jewish Federation of Palm Springs and Desert Area
The federation is dedicated to promoting the values and quality of jewish life and is committed to fostering a continuity of jewish life for future generations.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 42% of JEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM SPRINGS AND DESERT AREA’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.
The 14 grants below total $492,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $941,000 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $449,000 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k3 grants · $21k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $124k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $348k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BIKUR CHOLIM | $140,000 |
| JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES | $105,000 |
| INLAND AND DESERT HILLEL COUNCIL | $103,000 |
| TEMPLE ISAIAH | $26,000 |
| ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE | $20,000 |
| TEMPLE SINAI | $19,500 |
| MIZELL SENIOR CENTER | $15,000 |
| JOSLYN SENIOR CENTER | $12,000 |
| TEC | $11,000 |
| ANGEL VIEW | $10,000 |
| ALEPH SCHOOL | $10,000 |
| CONGREGATION BETH SHALOM | $7,500 |
| SAFEHOUSE OF THE DESERT | $7,500 |
| BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB | $5,500 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $1.4M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those 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.
Grants abroad, by region — $429k on the FY2025 return
Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: HUMANITARIAN
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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +71% since the first grant, against +14% for the ones you funded once.
31 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2025, 19 since wound down; 2 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, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $18k 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
- JFJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF THE DESERT9× · 2017–2025 · $1.2M · revenue +58%
The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc2× · 2023–2024 · $300k · revenue +1%- IAInland and Desert Hillel Council3× · 2023–2025 · $288k · revenue +28% · 59% of their budget
Funded once
- BCBIKUR CHOLIM - COMMUNITY MISSIONone grant, 2024 · $130k
- ZZAKAone grant, 2024 · $15k
- COCHABAD OF PALM SPRINGSone grant, 2017 · $15k
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.
The international fellowship of christian and jews is the leading non-profit building bridges between christians and jews, blessing israel and the jewish people around the world with, humanitarian care and life-saving aid.
To help build a more just society by creating model programs for disadvantaged populations. The activities focus primarily on helping Israel overcome the challenges facing five groups (cont. on sched O):
Jewish philanthropies of southern arizona (jpsa) is committed to achieving the full potential of jewish philanthropy, now and for future generations. comprised of jewish federation of southern arizona (jfsa or federation) and jewish…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Federation of Orange County and the most unlike its peers is Tzedakah Fund. 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.
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 46 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 15% 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.
29 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. 29 of the 47 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 THE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF THE DESERT ↗
- Who funds JEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC ↗
- Who funds The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc ↗
- Who funds Inland and Desert Hillel Council ↗
- Who funds JEWISH AGENCY FOR ISRAEL - NORTH AMERICAN COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds Angel View Inc ↗
- Who funds THE JEWISH AGENCY FOR ISRAEL ↗
- Who funds MIZELL CENTER ↗
- Who funds ZAKA NORTH INC ↗
- Who funds FOOD IN NEED OF DISTRIBUTION INC ↗
- Who funds Cove Communities Senior Association DBA The Joslyn Center ↗
- Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET ISRAEL INC ↗
- Who funds ISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF AKIM USA INC ↗
- Who funds DESERT ARC ↗
- Who funds DAP Health Inc ↗
- Who funds McCallum Theatre Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MEIR PANIM ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF COACHELLA VALLEY ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF ORANGE COUNTY ↗
- Who funds PALM SPRINGS ART MUSEUM ↗
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: Inland Empire Community Foundation · Regional Access Project Foundation · The Grace Helen Spearman Foundation · Charity Works · Houston Family Foundation · The Champions Volunteer Foundation · The Auen Foundation · The Coeta and Donald Barker Foundation · Bighorn Golf Club Charities Inc · HN and Frances C Berger Foundation · The Galen Family Foundation · The Art Laboe Foundation Inc
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 Jewish Federation of Palm Springs and Desert Area 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.
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.