Skip to content
Phyllis & Sidney Reisman Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Phyllis & Sidney Reisman Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$210k
Granted FY2024still arriving
26
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$35k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$644kEducation$159kPhilanthropy$114kInternational$60kCivil Rights$26kSocial Science$25kHealth$21kFood & Nutrition$20kOther$0
02FY2024 · 26 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k18 grants · $72k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $138k
$5,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$4.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
YOUNG ISRAEL OF HARRISON$35,000
THE FRISCH SCHOOL$25,000
KIDNEY FOUNDATION$18,000
HEBREW ACADEMY OF CLEVELAND$15,000
WESTCHESTER DAY SCHOOL$15,000
CONGREGATION AVODAH BRURAH$10,000
TOURO UNIVERSITY$10,000
JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE$10,000
Individual grant recipient$7,500
MEDWISH INTERNATIONAL$5,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
CHABAD HOUSE OF CLEVELAND$5,000
CHABAD BAHIA BLANCA$5,000
NEW SYNAGOGUE OF PALM BEACH$5,000
CLEVELAND KOSHER FOOD PANTRY$5,000
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 (FY17–17, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CGCC FOUNDATION: $5k → 17%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

NY
MA
OH
PA
NJ
CA
KY
MD
AZ
TN
FL
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.
04

Where the work is directed

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

About 5% of Phyllis & Sidney Reisman Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Phyllis & Sidney Reisman Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

64%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$659k · 22 repeat orgs$369k to everyone else

22 repeat relationships: 17 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
30

Total granted

$659k
$318k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
+145%

Still filing today

36%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $52k 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
InternationalHealthEducationReligionCivil RightsHuman ServicesOther
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

  • TF
    The Frisch School
    2× · 2023–2024 · $50k · revenue +15%
  • FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES
    3× · 2017–2024 · $22k · revenue +53%
  • MM
    MEDWISH MEDWORKS
    4× · 2021–2024 · $20k · revenue +18%

Funded once

  • YI
    YUNG ISRAEL OF CLEVELAND
    one grant, 2019 · $225k
  • HU
    HARVARD UNIVERSITY - HASTY PUDDING INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2017 · $25k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $10k
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
The Jerusalem Connection
—
3
Foundation for Conservative Judiasm of South Florida
—
4
The Steinhardt Foundation for Jewish Life Inc
Religion
5
Eastern European Jewish Heritage Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
7
The Bnai Jacob Foundation
—
8
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
9
Fuchs Mizrachi Schools

The mission of fuchs mizrachi school is to educate each child in the orthodox jewish religious zionist tradition, imbued with the love of g-d, torah, people and the land of israel.

—
10
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
11
The Jewish Museum

The mission of the jewish museum is to collect, preserve, exhibit and interpret art and jewish culture. see schedule o for more information.

Arts & Culture
12
The Chasdei Shimon Foundation
Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Federation of Palm Beach County Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Tikvah Fund. 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

21 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. 21 of the 63 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/21
Grantees still filing
14/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

YUNG ISRAEL OF CLEVELAND: $225,000 · OtherYUNG ISRAEL OF CLEVELANDCHABAD HOUSE OF CLEVELAND: $203,000 · OtherCHABAD HOUSE OF CLEVELANDNATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG ISRAEL: $106,800 · OtherNATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG ISRAELTHE LEFFELL SCHOOL: $55,000 · OtherTHE LEFFELL SCHOOL+46 more: $325,550 · Other+46 moreThe Frisch School: $50,000 · EducationTHE TIKVAH FUND: $1,800 · EducationJEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $35,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INC: $15,000 · PhilanthropyFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $22,300 · InternationalNATIONAL COMMITTEE ON UNITED STATES -CHINA RELATIONS INC: $8,300 · InternationalCHINA INSTITUTE IN AMERICA INCORPORATED: $3,800 · InternationalMEDWISH MEDWORKS: $20,000 · Health+2 more: $1,000 · HealthCHABAD BAHIA BLANCA: $10,000 · ReligionJEWISH RENAISSANCE EXPERIENCE INC: $5,000 · ReligionAMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE: $6,000 · Civil Rights
Other$915,350Education$51,800Philanthropy$50,000International$34,400Health$21,000Religion$15,000Civil Rights$6,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10k$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetThe Frisch School: $50,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $35,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $22,300 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMEDWISH MEDWORKS: $20,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHEBREW ACADEMY OF CLEVELAND: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCHABAD BAHIA BLANCA: $10,000 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetNATIONAL COMMITTEE ON UNITED STATES -CHINA RELATIONS INC: $8,300 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE: $6,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH RENAISSANCE EXPERIENCE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSAM & ESTHER MINSKOFF CULTURAL CENTER PARK EAST DAY SCHOOL INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCGCC FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCHINA INSTITUTE IN AMERICA INCORPORATED: $3,800 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF NEW YORK CITY INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TIKVAH FUND: $1,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE BEAM FOUNDATION: $1,500 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetFLORIDA VISION FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 1y, 37% of budgetMCCREARY COUNTY HERITAGE FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGEORGE SNOW SCHOLARSHIP FUND INC: $300 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.

  • Who funds The Frisch School ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES ↗
  • Who funds MEDWISH MEDWORKS ↗
  • Who funds HEBREW ACADEMY OF CLEVELAND ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INC ↗
  • Who funds CHABAD BAHIA BLANCA ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON UNITED STATES -CHINA RELATIONS INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH RENAISSANCE EXPERIENCE INC ↗
  • Who funds SAM & ESTHER MINSKOFF CULTURAL CENTER PARK EAST DAY SCHOOL INC ↗
  • Who funds CGCC FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds CHINA INSTITUTE IN AMERICA INCORPORATED ↗

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 Federation of …Jewish Communal FundCenter for Initiative…FjcThe Goldman Sachs Cha…National Society for …Gs Donor Advised Phil…The Ojc FundJpmorgan Chase Founda…Vanguard Charitable E…Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…
Jewish Federation of ClevelandOH19.3× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Federation of Cleveland · Jewish Communal Fund · Center for Initiatives in Jewish Education · Fjc · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · National Society for Hebrew Day Schools · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Ojc Fund · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust

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 Phyllis & Sidney Reisman Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Phyllis & Sidney Reisman Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • The Frisch School: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely 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 63 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Phyllis & Sidney Reisman’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