· Public charity
Libitzky Family Foundation
Supports charitable, educational, & religious purposes of jewish comm federation of sf.
Read this first · the figures below need context
97% of Libitzky Family Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Jewish Community Federation Of San Francisco The Peninsula Marin & Sonoma, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 3 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2018, the last year Libitzky Family Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 53 organizations, $2M. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2018
- Under $10k20 grants · $110k
- $10k–50k28 grants · $399k
- $50k–250k7 grants · $540k
- $250k+1 grant · $600k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WASHINGTON INSTITUTE FOR NEAR EAST POLICY | $600,000 |
| JEWISH FEDERATION OF THE EAST BAY | $157,500 |
| AIPAC THE AMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE | $100,000 |
| CHABAD JEWISH CENTER OF OAKLAND | $77,500 |
| THE MAGNES COLLECTION OF JEWISH ART AND LIFE | $55,000 |
| ARIZONA JEWISH HISTORICAL SOCIETY | $50,000 |
| JEWISH COMMUNITY RELATIONS COUNCIL OF SAN FRANCISCO | $50,000 |
| AMERICAN ISRAEL EDUCATION FOUNDATION | $50,000 |
| HENRY JACKSON SOCIETY | $30,000 |
| AFRICAN MIDDLE EASTERN LEADERSHIP PROJECT | $25,000 |
| ISRAEL21C | $25,000 |
| MEMRI--MIDDLE EAST MEDIA AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE | $25,000 |
| JEWISH FILM INSTITUTE | $20,000 |
| J THE JEWISH WEEKLY OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA | $20,000 |
| THE ISRAEL PROJECT | $20,000 |
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 (FY17–18, $27k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 69% of Libitzky Family Foundation’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, 83% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 80% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
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.
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 +30% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
37 repeat relationships — 36 still active in FY2018, 1 since wound down; 19 grantees were first funded in FY2018 (too recent to call). Read against FY2018, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k 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
- AIAMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE9× · 2017–2025 · $880k · revenue +45%
- DMDEMOCRATIC MAJORITY FOR ISRAEL D/B/A DMFI6× · 2020–2025 · $300k · revenue +30%
- CCCONTRA COSTA JEWISH DAY SCHOOL3× · 2017–2019 · $45k · revenue +115%
Funded once
- RERESEARCH - EVAL - PROMOTING ORG RESPON & TRANSPARENCY - REPORT - INCone grant, 2017 · $50k · revenue +7%
- LJLehrhaus Judaica dba HAMAQOM The Placeone grant, 2017 · $50k · revenue -21%
- JIJIMENA INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +214%
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 jewish electorate institute (jei) is an independent, non-partisan 501(c)(3) organization that surveys, interprets, reports, and educates the public about the perspectives, voting behaviors, and motivations of the american jewish…
Our vision is to reignite the zionist spirit and meet the needs of jewish civilization in the twenty-first century by connecting people around the world through the vibrancy and creativity of contemporary israeli culture.
Promotes excellence in jewish learning & leadership within a pluralistic environment. see sch ohebrew college promotes excellence in jewish learning and leadership within a pluralistic environment of open inquiry, intellectual rigor,…
The israel institute, inc. (the institute) enhances knowledge about modern israel by ensuring that more students have access to courses about israel during their time on campus.
To create an informed, celebratory and satisfying jewish community for students at the university of southern california, to deepen jewish identity through social, intellectual and spiritual participation, to offer diversified…
Based on jewish values, the jewish federation of greater los angeles convenes and leads the community and leverages its resources to assure the continuity of the jewish people, support a secure state of israel, care for jews in need here…
San Diego Jewish Academy empowers each student to learn for life, guided by Jewish values and rooted in strength of community.
To support a strong and secure israel and to carry out public information activities on the middle east peace issues in the united states.
To promote and enhance jewish religious observance in canada
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma and the most unlike its peers is Bluestar Charitable Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 30 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
66 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. 66 of the 68 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 JEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION OF SAN FRANCISCO THE PENINSULA MARIN & SONOMA ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON INSTITUTE FOR NEAR EAST POLICY ↗
- Who funds JEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION OF THE GREATER EAST BAY ↗
- Who funds DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY FOR ISRAEL D/B/A DMFI ↗
- Who funds BERKELEY HILLEL ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ISRAEL EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds JEWISH COMMUNITY RELATIONS COUNCIL OF SAN FRANCISCO MARIN & PENINSULA ↗
- Who funds THE HENRY JACKSON SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds MAGNES MUSEUM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Arizona Jewish Historical Society ↗
- Who funds RESEARCH - EVAL - PROMOTING ORG RESPON & TRANSPARENCY - REPORT - INC ↗
- Who funds Lehrhaus Judaica dba HAMAQOM The Place ↗
- Who funds PRO-ISRAEL AMERICA UNITED ↗
- Who funds JCC PRIVATE SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds CONTRA COSTA JEWISH DAY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds MIDDLE EAST MEDIA AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds Israel 21c ↗
- Who funds THE ISRAEL PROJECT ↗
- Who funds San Francisco Jewish Community Publications Inc ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE ↗
- Who funds Jewish Film Institute ↗
- Who funds THE AFRICAN MIDDLE EASTERN LEADERSHIP PROJECT ↗
- Who funds BAY AREA JEWISH ACTION ↗
- Who funds MIDDLE EAST FORUM ↗
- Who funds BERKELEY REPERTORY THEATRE ↗
- Who funds American Friends of Israel Philharmonic Orchestra ↗
- Who funds B'NAI B'RITH YOUTH ORGANIZATION ↗
- Who funds Foundation for the Defense of Democracies Inc ↗
- Who funds OAKLAND SCHOOL FOR THE ARTS ↗
- Who funds ISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds JEWISH INSTITUTE FOR NATIONAL SECURITY OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds UNITED NATIONS WATCH - USA ↗
- Who funds TAUBE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH LIFE AND CULTURE ↗
- Who funds THE SHALOM HARTMAN INSTITUTE OF NORTH AMERICA ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO HILLEL ↗
- Who funds OPENDOR MEDIA 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 Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Koret Foundation · The Jewish Community Foundation · Goodman Family Supporting Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Newton & Rochelle Becker Charitable Trus · Jewish Communal Fund · Jewish Community Foundation of San Diego · The Milstein Family Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of the Greater East Bay · The Donald and Carole Chaiken Foundation · Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston 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 Libitzky Family 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 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Libitzky Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Libitzky Family Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.