Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Ruth Reinhard Fletcher Charitable 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.

$183k
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$80k
Largest
01What you fund
0168% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY20222024.

Human Services$319kPhilanthropy$106kCivil Rights$20kReligion$15kEducation$10kArts & Culture$6kYouth Development$4kHealth$3kRecreation & Sports$2kOther$228k
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k4 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $40k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $130k
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$4.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JCC OF NORTH AMERICA$80,000
UJA FEDERATION OF NEW YORK$50,000
JCC OF NORTH AMERICA$20,000
JEWISH SILICON VALLEY$10,000
ALL STARS HELPING KIDS$10,000
OSHMAN FAMILY JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER$7,500
JEWISH SILICON VALLEY$4,000
JCC OF NORTH AMERICA$1,000
JEWISH FUNDERS NEWORK$875
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:

Your human-services grants (FY22–24, $319k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 41% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 9%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER ASSOCIATION: $50k → 11%BOULDER JCC: $5k → 12%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER ASSOCIATION: $75k → 17%JEWISH SILICON VALLEY: $100k → 8%JEWISH SILICON VALLEY: $75k → 8%JEWISH SILICON VALLEY: $10k → 8%JEWISH SILICON VALLEY: $4k → 8%JEWISH SILICON VALLEY: $371 → 8%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.

Which US states your grants reach

NY
MA
NJ
CA
CO
MO
TN
DC

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 31% of Ruth Reinhard Fletcher Charitable Foundation’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.

Ruth Reinhard Fletcher Charitable Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 7.0% directed abroad (not shown)

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.

22%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$104k · 5 repeat orgs$364k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +44% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.

5 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
16

Total granted

$104k
$212k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+44%
+16%

Still filing today

100%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 10% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $152k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24
Human ServicesPhilanthropyYouth DevelopmentHealthCivil RightsReligionOther

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

  • OF
    OSHMAN FAMILY JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER
    2× · 2022–2024 · $24k · revenue +19%
  • ZM
    ZIONESS MOVEMENT INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $20k · revenue +63%
  • JI
    JEWBELONG INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $15k · revenue +44%

Funded once

  • JC
    JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERS ASSOCIATION OF NORTH AMERICA
    one grant, 2023 · $75k · revenue -6%
  • JC
    JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER
    one grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue +8%
  • SU
    STAND UP TO CANCER A DIVISION OF ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $36k

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

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
The Jewish Community Center in Manhattan Inc

Together with our community, jcc manhattan creates opportunities for people to connect, grow, and learn within an ever-changing jewish landscape.

Human Services
2
Hebrew College

Promotes excellence in jewish learning & leadership within a pluralistic environment. see sch ohebrew college promotes excellence in jewish learning and leadership within a pluralistic environment of open inquiry, intellectual rigor,…

Education
3
University of Southern California Hillel Foundation

To create an informed, celebratory and satisfying jewish community for students at the university of southern california, to deepen jewish identity through social, intellectual and spiritual participation, to offer diversified…

4
National Council of Jewish Women Inc Jersey Hills Section
5
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
6
Hillel Jewish University Center

To enrich the lives of jewish undergraduate students so that they may enrich the jewish people and the world.

7
The Jewish Agency for Israel

The jewish agency binds jews across ideologies and civilizations together in a worldwide jewish family with israel at its center. it provides the global framework for aliyah, ensures global jewish safety, strengthens jewish identity and…

8
American Jewish Committee

AJC's mission is to enhance the wellbeing of the Jewish people and Israel, and to advance human rights and democratic values in the United States and around the world. In pursuit of this mission, AJC advances democratic principles, fights…

Civil Rights
9
Kaiserman Jewish Community Center

The kaiserman jewish community center aspires to be the premier multi-generational hub of non-denominational jewish activity. we strive to positively impact the wellness of the mind, body and spirit in an inclusive environment for this and…

Recreation & Sports
10
Jewish Association for Community Living Inc

The jewish association for community living responds to the needs of persons with developmental disabilities and their families in our community by providing quality support and services enhanced by jewish tradition.

11
San Diego Jewish Academy

San Diego Jewish Academy empowers each student to learn for life, guided by Jewish values and rooted in strength of community.

Education
12
Abraham Joshua Heschel Day School

Abraham joshua heschel day school cultivates students' natural sense of wonder into an exceptionally rich education that encourages critical thinking, creativity, and compassion. in partnership with our families, we inspire our students to…

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Oshman Family Jewish Community Center and the most unlike its peers is J Leaders. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 37 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%0%<5yr14%18%5–10yr19%5%10–20yr16%27%20–35yr13%18%35–55yr16%32%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%0%<5yr14%8%5–10yr19%9%10–20yr16%5%20–35yr13%50%35–55yr16%27%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/23
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,542

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

22 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. 22 of the 27 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/22
Grantees still filing
16/22
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

JEWISH SILICON VALLEY — $189,371 · Human ServicesJEWISH SILICON VALLEYJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERS ASSOCIATION OF NORTH AMERICA — $75,000 · Human ServicesJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERS ASSOCIATION OF NORTH AMER…JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER — $50,000 · Human ServicesJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER+1 more — $5,000 · Human ServicesJCC OF NORTH AMERICA — $101,000 · OtherJCC OF NORTH AMERICASTAND UP TO CANCER A DIVISION OF ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY FOUNDATION — $36,000 · OtherSTAND UP TO CANCER A DIVISION OF ENTE…ALL STARS HELPING KIDS INC — $30,000 · OtherALL STARS HELPING KIDS INCOSHMAN FAMILY JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER — $23,500 · OtherOSHMAN FAMILY JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERHILLEL OF SILICON VALLEY INC — $15,000 · OtherHILLEL OF SILICON VALLEY INC+10 more — $30,200 · Other+10 moreUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC — $50,000 · PhilanthropyUNITED JEWISH AP…HOPEWELL FUND — $50,000 · PhilanthropyHOPEWELL FUNDJEWISHColorado — $5,000 · Philanthropy+1 more — $875 · PhilanthropyZIONESS MOVEMENT INC — $20,000 · Civil RightsJEWBELONG INC — $15,000 · ReligionCHAPMAN UNIVERSITY — $10,000 · EducationAmerican Friends of Israel Philharmonic Orchestra — $6,000 · Arts & Culture
Human Services$319,371Other$235,700Philanthropy$105,875Civil Rights$20,000Religion$15,000Education$10,000Arts & Culture$6,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetJEWISH SILICON VALLEY — $189,371 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERS ASSOCIATION OF NORTH AMERICA — $75,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER — $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC — $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHOPEWELL FUND — $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALL STARS HELPING KIDS INC — $30,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetOSHMAN FAMILY JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER — $23,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetZIONESS MOVEMENT INC — $20,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetJEWBELONG INC — $15,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetHILLEL OF SILICON VALLEY INC — $15,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetCHAPMAN UNIVERSITY — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Friends of Israel Philharmonic Orchestra — $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER — $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLAWRENCE FAMILY JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISHColorado — $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJ LEADERS — $3,600 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC — $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SUMMIT LEAGUE — $2,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetJewish Women International — $1,800 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetOakland Genesis DBA Oakland Genesis Soccer Club — $1,800 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetJEWISH FUNDERS NETWORK — $875 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOSTON UNIVERSITY HILLEL INC — $500 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & SonomaCA23× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Jewish Silicon Valley · The Harold Grinspoon Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Arcadia Foundation · Jewish Community Centers Association of North America · Foundation for Jewish Camp Inc · Koret Foundation · Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · American Endowment Foundation

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 Ruth Reinhard Fletcher Charitable Foundation 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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.

    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 27 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-PF 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