· Private foundation
Joan S and Leon Meyers Foundation
Its FY2024 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
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k19 grants · $74k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $215k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WESTCHESTER DAY SCHOOL | $50,000 |
| AMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET | $45,000 |
| NEVE MICHAEL CHILDRENS VILLAGE | $38,000 |
| JEWISH NATIONAL FUND | $36,000 |
| AMIT | $30,000 |
| FRIENDS OF YAD SARAH | $25,000 |
| AMERICAN FREINDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM | $18,000 |
| SHARSHERET | $13,000 |
| BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $8,500 |
| SIMON WISENTHAL CENTER | $8,500 |
| young israel of hollywood | $7,000 |
| PARK VIEW MINYAN INC | $7,000 |
| CHAI LIFELINE | $5,000 |
| THE AMERICAN ISRAEL EDUCATION FOUNDATION | $4,500 |
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 53% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +49% since the first grant, against +32% for the ones you funded once.
45 repeat relationships — 22 still active in FY2024, 23 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9k 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
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET ISRAEL INC8× · 2017–2024 · $303k · revenue +169%
- UJUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC7× · 2017–2023 · $232k · revenue +39%
- NMNeve Michael Childrens Village Inc8× · 2017–2024 · $229k · revenue +16%
Funded once
- RIRABBI ISAAC ELCHANAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARYgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue +58%
- CHCHILDRENS HOSPITAL AT MONTIFIOREone grant, 2017 · $5k
- HCHOPE COMMUNITY SERVICES INCone grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue -20%
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 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 university is composed of several colleges and schools providing undergraduate, graduate, professional and post-doctoral education and training and research and clinical programs.
Biu produces students who excel in the sciences, humanities, law, engineering, business & the arts.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Communal Fund and the most unlike its peers is Park View Minyan Inc. 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 36 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 10% 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.
38 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. 38 of the 73 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 AMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET ISRAEL INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds Neve Michael Childrens Village Inc ↗
- Who funds JEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF YAD SARAH INC ↗
- Who funds BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Sharsheret Inc ↗
- Who funds SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM ↗
- Who funds CAMP YAVNEH INC ↗
- Who funds ISRAEL CANCER RESEARCH FUND INC ↗
- Who funds JERUSALEM FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds RABBI ISAAC ELCHANAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY ↗
- Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗
- Who funds PARK VIEW MINYAN INC ↗
- Who funds JEWISH COMMUNAL FUND ↗
- Who funds The Frisch School ↗
- Who funds MASBIA ↗
- Who funds EZRA ACADEMY OF GREATER NEW HAVEN INC ↗
- Who funds FEEDING WESTCHESTER INC ↗
- Who funds THE SHALOM HARTMAN INSTITUTE OF NORTH AMERICA ↗
- Who funds MAKING HEADWAY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc ↗
- Who funds KATZ YESHIVA HIGH SCHOOL OF SOUTH FLORIDA INC ↗
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 Communal Fund · Fjc · The Ari & Cheryl Pearl Foundation Inc · United Jewish Community of Broward County Inc · Jewish National Fund (Keren Kayemeth Leisrael) Inc · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · The Silberman Aqua Family Foundation · The Lee and Cheryl Lasher Family Foundation Inc · The Jewish Federation of Greater Washington Inc · Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles
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 Joan S and Leon Meyers 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Pacific House Inc — 46% of income from government
- Inspirica Inc — 30% of income from government
- Brandeis University — 9% of income from government
- Sharsheret Inc — 4% of income from government
- The Frisch School — 0% 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.