Skip to content
Morris and Terri Sitt Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Morris and Terri Sitt Family Foundation

Its FY2019 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$3k
Granted FY2019
3
Grants FY2019
2
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2019.

Religion$22kEducation$2kHuman Services$2kHealth$900Food & Nutrition$720Public Safety & Disaster$100Arts & Culture$52International$36Other$0
02FY2019 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$501
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EDMOND J SAFRA SYNAGOGUE$2,216
Individual grant recipient$501
CONGREGATION BETH TORAH$180
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY18–18, $483) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 37% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%AHAVAT HAIM VACHESED: $303 → 6%MITZVAH MAN FOUNDATION: $180 → 20%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
2
Yeshiva Derech Hatorah-Yeshivat Mizrachi Lbanim

A school-section 170(b)(1)(a)(ii), operating from the preschool pre-k level through high school, and chartered ny the new york state education department and board of regents.

Education
3
American Friends of Amshinover Yeshiva Jerusalem Inc

Support of religious schools in Israel

International
4
Sherit Isroel
—
5
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
6
Yeshiva Yesodei Hachaim

To provide secondary high school education in Brooklyn, NY

—
7
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
8
Yeshiva Keren Hatorah of Passaic- Clifton

To operate a high school offering religious instruction and general studies as well as a post high school program of talmudic studies. the school shall be run under the standards of orthodox jewish law and tradition.

Education
9
Yeshiva Chayei Olam

Yeshiva chayei olam inc., was established for the purpose of having an orthodox jewish high school. the school teaches talumdic studies, talmudic jurasprudence, orthodox jewish ethics and the old testament. in addition, the school provides…

Education
10
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
11
Bais Yehuda Perach Rochel Foundation
Public Benefit
12
Yeshiva Beit Rafael

Religious & charitable- to provide funds to enable the study of torah.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Yeshivat Shaare Torah Inc; the most unlike its peers is Allenhurst Fire Department No 1. 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

19 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 19 of the 36 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/19
Grantees still filing
16/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

EDMOND J SAFRA SYNAGOGUE: $10,639 · OtherEDMOND J SAFRA SYNAGOGUEIndividual grant recipient: $8,003 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+21 more: $3,794 · Other+21 moreAmerican Friends of Ramot Torah Schools: $1,217 · EducationBET YAAKOV OF THE JERSEY SHORE INC: $250 · EducationBARKAI FOUNDATION INC: $180 · EducationYESHIVA KETER TORAH INC: $180 · EducationYESHIVAT SHAARE TORAH INC: $100 · EducationSEPHARDIC COMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER INC: $1,180 · Youth DevelopmentTHE SEPHARDIC FOOD FUND INC: $720 · Food & NutritionSHARE OF NEW SQUARE INC DBA CHESED 247: $180 · Food & NutritionCHAI LIFELINE INC: $360 · HealthISRAEL CHILDRENS CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $180 · HealthAHAVAT HAIM VACHESED: $303 · Human ServicesMITZVAH MAN FOUNDATION CORP: $180 · Human ServicesShuvi Nafshi Foundation INC: $101 · Religion
Other$22,436Education$1,927Youth Development$1,180Food & Nutrition$900Health$540Human Services$483Religion$101

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAmerican Friends of Ramot Torah Schools: $1,217 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSEPHARDIC COMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER INC: $1,180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SEPHARDIC FOOD FUND INC: $720 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $360 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAHAVAT HAIM VACHESED: $303 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBET YAAKOV OF THE JERSEY SHORE INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetISRAEL CANCER RESEARCH FUND INC: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBARKAI FOUNDATION INC: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetISRAEL CHILDRENS CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSHARE OF NEW SQUARE INC DBA CHESED 247: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA KETER TORAH INC: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMITZVAH MAN FOUNDATION CORP: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGESHER YEHUDA INC: $101 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetShuvi Nafshi Foundation INC: $101 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPorat Yoseph Foundation: $101 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALLENHURST FIRE DEPARTMENT NO 1: $100 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetYESHIVAT SHAARE TORAH INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $52 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEMUNAH OF AMERICA INC: $36 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Jack Adjmi Family Fou…The Howard Hoffman & …The Ralph S Gindi Fam…Jewish Communal FundRalph and Sondra Sutt…Altoon Sutton Memoria…Samuel & Mollie Jemal…E R G FoundationChehebar Family Found…Ronald and Lillie Ade…Abraham D & Annette C…Ic Hessed Foundation
Jack Adjmi Family Foundation IncNY35.2× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · The Howard Hoffman & Sons Foundation Inc · The Ralph S Gindi Family Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Ralph and Sondra Sutton Foundation · Altoon Sutton Memorial Fund · Samuel & Mollie Jemal Foundation Co Jem Realty · E R G Foundation · Chehebar Family Foundation · Ronald and Lillie Ades Foundation · Abraham D & Annette Cohen Foundation · Ic Hessed Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Morris and Terri Sitt Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Morris and Terri Sitt Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 9%
  • Bet Yaakov of the Jersey Shore Inc: 9% of income from government
  • Yeshiva Keter Torah Inc: 8% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Morris and Terri Sitt Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Morris and Terri Sitt 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 36 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Morris and Terri Sitt Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home