Skip to content
Rita C & John Haddow Family Support Foundation at a glance

· Public charity

Rita C & John Haddow Family Support Foundation

To support the jewish community and the community as a whole.

$295k
Granted FY2020
5
Grants FY2020
3
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2020.

Health$1.0MPhilanthropy$362kEducation$30kYouth Development$22kHuman Services$5k
02FY2020 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $287,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $294,500 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $7,500 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2020

  • Under $10k2 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $265k
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JDRF (JUVENILE DIABETES RESEARCH FOUNDATION)$200,000
JEWISH FEDERATION OF METROPOLITAN DETROIT$65,000
JARC$10,000
JEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH$7,000
JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER PILLAR$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 (FY17–20, $50k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF METRO DETROIT: $5k → 8%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER PILLAR: $5k → 8%JARC: $10k → 8%JARC: $10k → 8%JARC: $10k → 8%JARC: $10k → 8%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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 5 repeat orgs$7k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2020, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
1

Total granted

$1.1M
$7k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+17%
+65%

Still filing today

80%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20
Human ServicesHealthPhilanthropyEducationOther
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

  • BT
    BREAKTHROUGH T1D
    3× · 2017–2020 · $950k · revenue +49%
  • J
    JARC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $40k · revenue -11%
  • ALUMNI ASSOCIATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
    2× · 2018–2019 · $30k · revenue +17%

Funded once

  • Y
    YOUTHPOWER365graduated
    one grant, 2017 · $7k · revenue +65%
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
The Jewish Fund

The jewish fund is organized and operates exclusively for charitable, educational, and religious purposes. the fund's primary activities are: supporting a jewish health care mission in the greater detroit area and michigan; promotion of…

Philanthropy
2
University of Judaism Foundation
—
3
Jewish Federation Council of Greater La

Based on jewish values, the jewish federation of greater los angeles convenes and leads the community and leverages its resources to assure the continuity of the jewish people, support a secure state of israel, care for jews in need here…

Philanthropy
4
Jewish Federation of Greater Ann Arbor

The federation provides and inspires philanthropic leadership and community-building to nurture a strong, engaged, connected, vibrant, and enduring jewish community locally, in israel, and around the world.

Philanthropy
5
Minneapolis Jewish Federation

Minneapolis jewish federation is a nonprofit organization that promotes a culture of philanthropy, leverages resources to meet local and global jewish needs, and facilitates community planning to ensure a thriving and secure future.

Philanthropy
6
Jewish Communal Fund

To facilitate and promote philanthropy through donor advised funds.

Philanthropy
7
Detroit Jews for Justice

Djj advances racial and economic justice by developing metro detroit jews as community organizers who fight for transformative policy change in deep partnership with neighbors

Civil Rights
8
American Jewish University

American jewish university (aju) advances and elevates the jewish journey of individuals, organizations and our community through excellence in scholarship, teaching, engaged conversation, and outreach. aju is a thriving center of jewish…

Education
9
Jewish Federation of Greater Dallas

The jewish federation of greater dallas coordinates and implements fundraising, social planning, leadership development and community relations for the jewish community locally & abroad.

Philanthropy
10
Jsl Foundation

We nurture a sense of community and enrich the lives of older adults, while embracing jewish values and celebrating life.

Human Services
11
Birmingham Jewish Federation Inc

The birmingham jewish federation is dedicated to nurturing and promoting jewish life in birmingham, nationally, in israel and throughout the world; is involved in building a better birmingham through alliances and partnerships with other…

Philanthropy
12
Jfa Non-Profit Housing Corporation

We nurture a sense of community and enrich the lives of older adults, while embracing jewish values and celebrating life.

Housing & Shelter
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Federation of Detroit; the most unlike its peers is Breakthrough T1D. 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 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. 8 of the 9 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BREAKTHROUGH T1D: $950,000 · HealthBREAKTHROUGH T1DJEWISH FEDERATION OF DETROIT: $260,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDERATION OF DETROITUNITED JEWISH FOUNDATION: $75,000 · PhilanthropyUNITED JEWISH FOUNDATIONJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INC: $27,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEA…+1 more: $7,000 · PhilanthropyJARC: $40,000 · Human ServicesJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF METROPOLITAN DETROIT: $10,000 · Human ServicesALUMNI ASSOCIATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $30,000 · EducationFRIENDSHIP CIRCLE: $20,000 · Other
Health$950,000Philanthropy$369,000Human Services$50,000Education$30,000Other$20,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBREAKTHROUGH T1D: $950,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF DETROIT: $260,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetUNITED JEWISH FOUNDATION: $75,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetJARC: $40,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INC: $27,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF METROPOLITAN DETROIT: $10,000 over 2y, 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Fidelity Investments …
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Rita C & John Haddow Family Support Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rita C & John Haddow Family Support Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Rita C & John Haddow Family Support Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Rita C & John Haddow Family Support 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 9 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2020, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Rita C & John Haddow Family Support’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