Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Michael & Anita Siegal Family Foundation

Further the charitable, educational, and religious purposes of the jewish federation of cleveland ("federation").

$121k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20192025.

Philanthropy$152kReligion$95kPublic Safety & Disaster$94kYouth Development$81kHealth$60kFood & Nutrition$24kEnvironment$10k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 5 grants below total $82,500 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $121,100 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $38,600 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 $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $75k
$15,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$2.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ADAMAH$25,000
JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC$25,000
FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC$15,000
JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND$10,000
HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE$7,500
02The need
03

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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC: $15k → 17%CHABAD OF BONITA SPRINGS INC: $10k → 11%HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $14k → 12%JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $64k → 17%ADAMAH: $25k → 11%FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC: $15k → 17%HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $8k → 12%JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $30k → 17%PEARLSTONE CONFERENCE & RETREAT CENTER INC: $15k → 11%FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC: $15k → 17%HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $8k → 12%JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $13k → 17%ADAMAH: $15k → 11%FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC: $12k → 17%HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $8k → 12%JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $10k → 17%FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC: $12k → 17%HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $8k → 12%JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $10k → 17%FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC: $12k → 17%JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $10k → 17%JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $32k → 17%CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $60k → 17%JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $25k → 17%CLEVELAND HILLEL FOUNDATION INC: $10k → 17%JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $15k → 17%JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $13k → 17%JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $13k → 17%JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $13k → 17%HAZON INC: $10k → 17%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein 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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

04

Where the work is directed

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

About 24% of Michael & Anita Siegal 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, 49% of the giving stays in OH; read by stated purpose it is 34% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Michael & Anita Siegal Family Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 35% 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.

67%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$180k · 3 repeat orgs$90k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +62% since the first grant, against +13% for the ones you funded once.

3 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
4

Total granted

$180k
$90k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+62%
+13%

Still filing today

100%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’25
Youth DevelopmentEducationReligionPhilanthropyOther

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

  • FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $81k · revenue +62%
  • AI
    ADAMAH INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $55k · revenue +365%
  • HF
    Hillel Foundation at Miami University
    6× · 2020–2025 · $44k · revenue +29%

Funded once

  • CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2022 · $60k · revenue +13%
  • CH
    CLEVELAND HILLEL FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue +24%
  • CO
    CHABAD OF BONITA SPRINGS INC
    one grant, 2019 · $10k

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.

1
University of Judaism Foundation
2
Greater Miami Hillel Foundation Inc

The mission of the organization is to enrich the lives of jewish undergraduate and graduate students so that they may enrich the jewish people and the world.

3
The University of Iowa Louis Shulman Hillel Foundation

The mission of Iowa Hillel is to enhance the lives of Jewish students at the University of Iowa, so they may enrich the Jewish people and the world. Iowa Hillel envisions a world for our students where they find a community here at Iowa…

4
Eastern European Jewish Heritage Foundation
Philanthropy
5
The Jewish Foundation of Cincinnati
Philanthropy
6
Hillel the Foundation for Jewish Campus Life

Hillel's mission is to enrich the lives of jewish undergraduate and graduate students so that they may enrich the jewish people and the world.

Religion
7
Hillel the Foundation for Jewish Campus Life

KU Hillel's mission is to connect Jewish students to each other and to their Judaism, to inspire and equip the next generation of Jewish leaders, and to build a thriving Jewish community on campus.

8
Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary

To prepare students for the rabbinate and to issue the traditional certificate of ordination in connection therewith. the seminary is authorized to confer the degree of master of hebrew literature (m.h.l.), doctor of hebrew literature…

Education
9
Yeshiva University

The university is composed of several colleges and schools providing undergraduate, graduate, professional and post-doctoral education and training and research and clinical programs.

Education
10
The Jerusalem Connection
11
The Steinhardt Foundation for Jewish Life Inc
Religion
12
B'nai Brith Hillel Foundation At Princeton

Cjl partners with students and other members of the princeton community to sustain and grow a welcoming, multi-faceted and pluralistic jewish community that is fully-integrated into the fabric of campus life and which provides personally…

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Federation of Cleveland and the most unlike its peers is Hillel Foundation at Miami University. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 9 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND — $136,500 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELANDTHE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC — $109,000 · PhilanthropyTHE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INCCLEVELAND HILLEL FOUNDATION INC — $10,000 · PhilanthropyFOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC — $81,000 · Youth DevelopmentFOUNDATION FOR JE…Hillel Foundation at Miami University — $44,000 · OtherHillel Foundat…CHABAD OF BONITA SPRINGS INC — $10,000 · OtherCHABAD OF BONI…HAZON INC — $10,000 · OtherHAZON INCCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY — $60,000 · EducationCASE WESTERN …ADAMAH INC — $55,000 · ReligionADAMAH INC
Philanthropy$255,500Youth Development$81,000Other$64,000Education$60,000Religion$55,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND — $136,500 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetTHE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC — $109,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC — $81,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY — $60,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetADAMAH INC — $55,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetHillel Foundation at Miami University — $44,000 over 6y, 3.5% of budgetCLEVELAND HILLEL FOUNDATION INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetHAZON INC — $10,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budget
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.

Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO7.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile 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 organization Michael & Anita Siegal 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.

2023
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Michael & Anita Siegal Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Michael & Anita Siegal 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 9 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph