Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Migdal Foundation Inc

Migdal foundation provides personalized care and support for parkinson's disease patient's.

$285k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$220k
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 FY20172024.

International$1.0MHealth$975k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $280k
$60,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MENUCHA CHESED SERVICES CORP$220,000
CHAI LIFELINE INC$60,000
CONGREGATION AHAVAS CHESED D BOBOV$5,200
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:

Your human-services grants (FY23–24, $240k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, 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.

area typical 11%MENUCHA CHESED SERVICES CORP: $220k → 20%MENUCHA CHESED SERVICES CORP: $20k → 20%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.

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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.9M · 8 repeat orgs$92k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +71% since the first grant, against -6% for the ones you funded once.

8 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
6

Total granted

$1.9M
$92k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+71%
-6%

Still filing today

50%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthInternationalReligionHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther

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

  • CL
    CHAI LIFELINE INC
    6× · 2017–2024 · $260k · revenue +58%
  • MC
    MENUCHA CHESED SERVICES CORP
    2× · 2023–2024 · $240k · revenue +184%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF SEEACH SODE INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $150k · revenue +71%

Funded once

  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF CHAIYANU
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -8%
  • EN
    EMINIM NOTZER INC
    one grant, 2019 · $15k
  • KU
    KUMI URI USAgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $15k · revenue +264%

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
Nefesh Chaim Inc
Religion
2
American Friends of Shevach Inc

To give educational rehabilitative solutions to children that have physical disabilities with learning abilities the rehabilitative shevach school combines professional studies and medical treatments

International
3
Sherit Isroel
4
American Friends of Hakav Hameached Inc

To help and support children with rare sybfromes and disorders and their families. to help and support children victimized and traumatized by terror attacks and thier families.

International
5
Smach Zevilin of Ny Inc

To provide financial aid and assistance to the poor, sick & disabled people, and monetary support to needy families in time of need.

Philanthropy
6
American Friends of Oseh Chayil

To further jewish education in israel

Religion
7
Zichron Meshilem Feish Inc

Provides finacial assistance to needy individuals and to religious, charitable organizations

8
American Friends of Tzohar

Support of tzohar-a school for special needs children located in israel

9
Yeshuas Chaim Inc

Promoting torah learning in israel; promoting awareness of todays mental health challenges and to provide financial assistance to individuals and families suffering from mental and emotional health issues. the organization will also…

Philanthropy
10
Israel Special Kids Fund

To improve the quality of life of disabled and seriously ill children.

Human Services
11
American Friends of Meshi Inc

Provide educational support for severely handicapped children in israel.

Philanthropy
12
Shaarei Halacha Inc
Philanthropy

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chai Lifeline Inc and the most unlike its peers is Kumi Uri Usa. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

04the 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 14 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

PROJECT REFUAH INC — $1,041,500 · InternationalPROJECT REFUAH INCCHAI LIFELINE INC — $260,000 · HealthCHAI LIFELINE INCINTEGRITY CARE SERVICES INC — $85,000 · HealthINTEGRITY CARE SERVI…KUMI URI USA — $15,000 · HealthMENUCHA CHESED SERVICES CORP — $240,000 · Human ServicesMENUCHA CHESE…REFUAH YESHUAH — $125,000 · OtherREFUAH YE…EMINIM NOTZER INC — $15,000 · OtherEMINIM NO…OHR HASHABBOS — $13,200 · OtherOHR HASHA…CONGREGATION AHAVAS CHESED D BOBOV — $10,400 · OtherCONGREGAT…+3 more — $11,500 · Other+3 moreFRIENDS OF SEEACH SODE INC — $150,000 · ReligionAMERICAN FRIENDS OF CHAIYANU — $50,000 · Philanthropy
International$1,041,500Health$360,000Human Services$240,000Other$175,100Religion$150,000Philanthropy$50,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetPROJECT REFUAH INC — $1,041,500 over 3y, 65% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC — $260,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetMENUCHA CHESED SERVICES CORP — $240,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetINTEGRITY CARE SERVICES INC — $85,000 over 3y, 2.8% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF CHAIYANU — $50,000 over 1y, 5.6% of budgetKUMI URI USA — $15,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetSINAI SPECIAL NEEDS INSTITUTE INC — $5,500 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds PROJECT REFUAH INC
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC
  • Who funds MENUCHA CHESED SERVICES CORP
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF SEEACH SODE INC
  • Who funds INTEGRITY CARE SERVICES INC
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF CHAIYANU
  • Who funds KUMI URI USA
  • Who funds SINAI SPECIAL NEEDS INSTITUTE 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.

The Ojc FundNY15.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Migdal Foundation Inc 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.

2023
2021222324
no gov · 20%1%4%8%15%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY2024

    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 Migdal Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Migdal Foundation Inc 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 14 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph