Skip to content
Myer H Goldman Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Myer H Goldman Foundation

$103k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0185% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Health$73kCivil Rights$38kReligion$37kHuman Services$28kInternational$20kEducation$14kArts & Culture$10kEmployment$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $88k
$12,500
Median grant
3
States reached
$231k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE$25,000
CAMP HASC$15,000
NEVUT$15,000
EMILYS ENTOURAGE$12,500
CHAI LIFELINE$10,000
JOINT DISTRIBUTION COMMITTEE$10,000
PARENTS PROJECT MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY$8,000
Individual grant recipient$7,500
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 (FY20–22, $23k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%JEWISH RELIEF AGENCY: $10k → 7%JEWISH RELIEF AGENCY: $5k → 7%JEWISH RELIEF AGENCY: $5k → 7%JCHAI: $3k → 10%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.

Which US states its grants reach

MN
NY
PA
NJ
VA
MD
DC
GA
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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

66%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$253k · 14 repeat orgs$128k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
22

Total granted

$253k
$96k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+13%
+31%

Still filing today

43%
55%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $33k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthInternationalReligionHuman ServicesCivil RightsFood & NutritionOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • AL
    ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE
    6× · 2017–2025 · $58k · revenue +78%
  • CF
    Cystic Fibrosis Research Fund Inc
    5× · 2017–2025 · $33k · revenue +202%
  • CL
    CHAI LIFELINE INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $28k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $15k
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM
    one grant, 2023 · $7k · revenue -51%
  • TC
    THE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIAgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +72%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its 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
University of Judaism Foundation
—
2
Idf Memorial Foundation
Philanthropy
3
The Bnai Jacob Foundation
—
4
Dorot Foundation
Philanthropy
5
Physicians for Palestine
Health
6
Yad Laniyim
Philanthropy
7
National Jewish Health

National Jewish Health's mission since 1899 is to heal, discover and educate as a preeminent healthcare institution. We serve by providing the best integrated and innovative care for patients and their families; by understanding and…

Health
8
Delegation of Jewish American Students (Dojas)
—
9
American Friends of Even Yisroel Charitable Foundation
Philanthropy
10
American Friends of Jewish Hospitals and Education Centers of Brazil Inc
Philanthropy
11
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
12
Sherit Isroel
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Friends of Magen David Adom; the most unlike its peers is Cystic Fibrosis Research Fund Inc. 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 39 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
10/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MYER GOLDMAN RELIGIOUS SCHOOL: $20,000 · OtherMYER GOLDMAN RELIGIOUS SCHOOLJDC: $15,000 · OtherJDCIndividual grant recipient: $15,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientNEVUT: $15,000 · OtherNEVUTPARENTS PROJECT MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY: $13,000 · OtherPARENTS PROJECT MUSCULAR DYSTROPHYIndividual grant recipient: $12,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTOOLS FOR SCHOOLS: $11,000 · OtherTOOLS FOR SCHOOLSPARENT PROJECT MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY: $10,000 · OtherPARENT PROJECT MUSCULAR DYSTROPHYIndividual grant recipient: $7,500 · OtherWOMENS CENTER OF MONTCO: $7,500 · Other+11 more: $40,500 · Other+11 moreCystic Fibrosis Research Fund Inc: $32,500 · HealthCystic Fibrosis Resea…CHAI LIFELINE INC: $27,700 · HealthCHAI LIFELINE INCTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA: $5,000 · HealthTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPIT…BE A PART OF THE CONVERSATION: $5,000 · HealthBE A PART OF THE CONV…NAMI National: $2,500 · HealthANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $57,500 · Civil RightsANTI-DEFAMATION L…The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc: $10,000 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $7,000 · InternationalFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $5,000 · InternationalHIAS INC: $5,000 · InternationalFRIENDS OF ISRAEL DISABLED VETERANS INC: $2,500 · InternationalCAMP HASC INC: $16,800 · ReligionAmerican Friends of Puah Inc: $5,000 · ReligionInstitute for Jewish Ethics: $2,500 · ReligionJEWISH RELIEF AGENCY: $20,000 · Human ServicesJUDITH CREED HORIZONS FOR ACHIEVING INDEPENDENCE: $2,500 · Human ServicesTHE FARM TEAM INC: $5,000 · Food & NutritionMEOR INC: $3,000 · Education
Other$166,500Health$72,700Civil Rights$57,500International$29,500Religion$24,300Human Services$22,500Food & Nutrition$5,000Education$3,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $57,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetCystic Fibrosis Research Fund Inc: $32,500 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $27,700 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH RELIEF AGENCY: $20,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetCAMP HASC INC: $16,800 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Friends of Puah Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBE A PART OF THE CONVERSATION: $5,000 over 1y, 8.0% of budgetHIAS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE FARM TEAM INC: $5,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetBlue Dove Foundation Inc: $5,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetMEOR INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetInstitute for Jewish Ethics: $2,500 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetNAMI National: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF ISRAEL DISABLED VETERANS INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJUDITH CREED HORIZONS FOR ACHIEVING INDEPENDENCE: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

  • Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
  • Who funds Cystic Fibrosis Research Fund Inc ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH RELIEF AGENCY ↗
  • Who funds CAMP HASC INC ↗
  • Who funds The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM ↗
  • Who funds THE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES ↗
  • Who funds American Friends of Puah Inc ↗
  • Who funds BE A PART OF THE CONVERSATION ↗
  • Who funds HIAS INC ↗
  • Who funds THE FARM TEAM INC ↗
  • Who funds Blue Dove Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds MEOR INC ↗
  • Who funds Institute for Jewish Ethics ↗
  • Who funds NAMI National ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF ISRAEL DISABLED VETERANS INC ↗
  • Who funds JUDITH CREED HORIZONS FOR ACHIEVING INDEPENDENCE ↗

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.

Jewish Communal FundVanguard Charitable E…Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Jewish Communal FundNY11.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Myer H Goldman Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Myer H Goldman 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 88%
  • Hias Inc: 88% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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.

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 39 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Myer H Goldman’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