Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Project Inspire Inc

The organization's mission is to plan, coordinate, operate and provide aid and assistance for jewish identity-building, leadership training and community service seminars and cognate educational programs and studies and to encourage others to also provide such aid and support; to provide financial support and assistance, scholarships and…

$24k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$12k
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.

Religion$601kEducation$7k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 2 grants below total $20,130 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $24,380 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $4,250 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $12k
$12,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$361k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
YESHIVA RABBI CHAIM BERLIN$12,000
BETH JACOB OF BORO PARK$8,130
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 95% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%YESHIVA BETH MOSHE: $12k → 13%MESIVTA OF LONG BEACH: $10k → 6%MERCAZ HATORAH BELLE HARBOR: $9k → 13%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA TIFERET: $7k → 14%YESHIVA TIFERES ELIMELECH: $20k → 20%YESHIVA GEDOLAH OF WATERBURY: $32k → 12%TELSHE YESHIVA: $8k → 14%KOLLEL INTERNATIONAL INC: $146k → 11%YKOP: $11k → 12%MESIVTA OF LONG BEACH: $10k → 6%YESHIVA TORAS CHAIM: $7k → 14%BETH JACOB OF BORO PARK: $9k → 20%YESHIVA GEDOLAH OF WATERBURY: $23k → 12%DERECH HACHAIM FUND: $8k → 11%YKOP: $6k → 12%MESIVTA OF LONG BEACH: $9k → 6%YESHIVA IMREI BINA INC: $18k → 20%YESHIVA GEDOLAH OF WATERBURY: $20k → 12%YESHIVA GEDOLAH HADRAS HATORAH: $7k → 11%YKOP: $5k → 12%BETH JACOB OF BORO PARK: $9k → 20%YESHIVA GEDOLAH OF WATERBURY: $20k → 12%YESHIVA KESSER TORAH: $6k → 11%YESHIVA TIFERES ELIMELECH: $18k → 20%YESHIVA GEDOLAH OF WATERBURY: $18k → 12%YESHIVA GEDOLAH HADRAS HATORAH: $5k → 11%BETH JACOB OF BORO PARK: $8k → 20%MESIVTA OF EATONTOWN: $5k → 11%YESHIVA TIFERES ELIMELECH: $16k → 20%BETH JACOB OF BORO PARK: $8k → 20%YESHIVA IMREI BINA INC: $9k → 20%BETH JACOB OF BORO PARK: $8k → 20%YESHIVA TIFERES ELIMELECH: $8k → 20%BETH JACOB OF BORO PARK: $6k → 20%YESHIVA BIRCHAS MOSHE: $7k → 20%BETH JACOB OF BORO PARK: $2k → 20%YESHIVA TIFERES ELIMELECH: $6k → 20%YESHIVAS OHR YERUSHALAYIM: $17k → 20%YESHIVA RABBI CHAIM BERLIN: $16k → 20%YESHIVA RABBI CHAIM BERLIN: $12k → 20%MESIVTA TIFERES SHMUEL: $8k → 20%MESIVTA TIFERES SHMUEL: $7k → 20%CONGREGATION OHEL YAAKOV: $13k → 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.

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 38% of Project Inspire Inc’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, 33% of the giving stays in NJ; read by stated purpose it is 27% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Project Inspire Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

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.

60%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$364k · 9 repeat orgs$243k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
12

Total granted

$364k
$243k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
+29%

Still filing today

22%
25%

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
ReligionPhilanthropyEducationOther

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

  • YG
    YESHIVA GEDOLAH OF WATERBURY
    5× · 2019–2023 · $113k
  • YT
    YESHIVA TIFERES ELIMELECH
    5× · 2017–2023 · $67k
  • BJ
    BETH JACOB OF BORO PARK
    7× · 2018–2024 · $50k

Funded once

  • KI
    KOLLEL INTERNATIONAL INC
    one grant, 2022 · $146k
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVAT OHR YERUSHALAYIM INC
    one grant, 2022 · $17k · revenue -8%
  • CO
    CONG OHEL TORAH
    one grant, 2023 · $13k

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

04Your field

Your grantees are a median of 28 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number23%10%<5yr16%10%5–10yr20%10%10–20yr21%25%20–35yr12%40%35–55yr7%5%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value23%3%<5yr16%2%5–10yr20%6%10–20yr21%48%20–35yr12%36%35–55yr7%5%55yr+

The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 10% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/21
the rest of the field
11%
3,824/34,048

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

05the grantee network

6 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. 6 of the 21 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
5/6
Grantees still filing
4/6
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

KOLLEL INTERNATIONAL INC — $146,000 · OtherKOLLEL INTERNATIONAL INCYESHIVA GEDOLAH OF WATERBURY — $113,073 · OtherYESHIVA GEDOLAH OF WATERBURYYESHIVA TIFERES ELIMELECH — $67,487 · OtherYESHIVA TIFERES ELIMELECHBETH JACOB OF BORO PARK — $50,195 · OtherBETH JACOB OF BORO PARKMESIVTA OF LONG BEACH — $28,500 · OtherMESIVTA OF LONG BEACHMESIVTA YESHIVA RABBI CHAIM BERLIN — $27,800 · OtherMESIVTA YESHIVA RABBI CHAIM BERLIN+9 more — $78,580 · Other+9 moreYESHIVA IMREI BINA INC — $27,100 · ReligionYESHIVA IMREI B…YESHIVA KTANA OF PASSAIC — $22,200 · ReligionYESHIVA KTANA O…AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVAT OHR YERUSHALAYIM INC — $17,000 · ReligionAMERICAN FRIEND…YESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK — $15,100 · ReligionYESHIVA OHR YIT…DERECH HACHAIM FUND INC — $7,500 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA TIFERET — $7,000 · Education
Other$511,635Religion$81,400Philanthropy$7,500Education$7,000

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 budgetYESHIVA IMREI BINA INC — $27,100 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetYESHIVA KTANA OF PASSAIC — $22,200 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVAT OHR YERUSHALAYIM INC — $17,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetYESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK — $15,100 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetDERECH HACHAIM FUND INC — $7,500 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA TIFERET — $7,000 over 1y, 0.5% 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 YESHIVA IMREI BINA INC
  • Who funds YESHIVA KTANA OF PASSAIC
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVAT OHR YERUSHALAYIM INC
  • Who funds YESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK
  • Who funds DERECH HACHAIM FUND INC
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA TIFERET

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 FundNY30.8× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore · Lakewood Cheder School Inc · National Society for Hebrew Day Schools · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Keren Yehuda Zvi Foundation · Jewish Federation of Cleveland · National Philanthropic Trust · T Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Project Inspire 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%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
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 Project Inspire Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Project Inspire 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 21 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