Skip to content

· Private foundation

Sapirstein-Stone-Weiss Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$473k
Granted FY2017
19
Grants FY2017
5
States reached
$246k
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of Sapirstein-Stone-Weiss Foundation’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Jewish Federation Of Cleveland, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2017, the last year Sapirstein-Stone-Weiss Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 9 organizations, $473k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

9
’17
3
’18
3
’19
2
’20
1
’21
0
’22
0
’23
0
’24

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Philanthropy$4.3MReligion$537kEducation$441kSocial Science$85kArts & Culture$30kHuman Services$16kInternational$12kCommunity Improvement$12kOther$0
02FY2017 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2017

  • Under $10k11 grants · $31k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $147k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $296k
$5,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$12M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FUCHS MIZRACHI SCHOOL$245,627
JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND$50,000
FEURERSTEIN INSTITUTE$40,000
PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC$35,000
GREEN ROAD SYNAGOGUE$30,380
MESTIVA OF WEST BLOOMFIELD$16,000
JEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY$13,000
MONTEFIORE FOUNDATION$12,500
CHABAD OF PALM BEACH GARDENS$9,500
UNITED ORTHODOX SYNAGOGUES$5,000
MALTZ MUSEUM OF JEWISH HERITAGE$5,000
YESHIVA BETH YEHUDAH$3,600
HILLEL OF BROWARD AND PALM BEACH$2,000
CAMP STONE$1,750
YACHAD$1,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%CAMP STONE: $150k → 14%CENTRAL FUND OF ISRAEL: $12k → 6%YACHAD: $1k → 17%UNITED ORTHODOX SYNAGOGUES: $5k → 16%GARDENS JEWISH EXPERIENCE: $500 → 11%MESIVTA OF WEST BLOOMFIELD: $16k → 8%PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $35k → 17%YACHAD: $1k → 17%JEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY: $13k → 11%MESTIVA OF WEST BLOOMFIELD: $16k → 8%HEBREW ACADEMY OF CLEVELAND: $2k → 17%14TH STREET YMCA: $500 → 17%CHABAD OF PALM BEACH GARDENS: $10k → 11%YESHIVA BETH YEHUDAH: $4k → 8%PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $1k → 17%HILLEL OF BROWARD AND PALM BEACH: $2k → 11%HEBREW ACADEMY OF CLEVELAND: $720 → 17%HILLEL OF BROWARD AND PALM BEACH: $2k → 11%JEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $900k → 17%JEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $850k → 17%JEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $850k → 17%JEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $850k → 17%JEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $750k → 17%FUCHS MIZRACHI SCHOOL: $246k → 17%CAMP STONE: $194k → 17%CAMP STONE: $75k → 17%GREEN ROAD SYNAGOGUE: $70k → 17%GREEN ROAD SYNAGOGUE: $50k → 17%JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $50k → 17%GREEN ROAD SYNAGOGUE: $30k → 17%GREEN ROAD SYNAGOGUE: $30k → 17%MALTZ MUSEUM OF JEWISH HERITAGE: $25k → 17%GREEN ROAD SYNAGOGUE: $20k → 17%MONTEFIORE FOUNDATION: $13k → 17%MANDEL JCC: $10k → 17%CEDAR SINAI SYNAGOGUE: $6k → 17%CEDAR SINAI SYNAGOGUE: $5k → 17%MALTZ MUSEUM OF JEWISH HERITAGE: $5k → 17%MONTEFIORE FOUNDATION: $3k → 17%CAMP STONE: $2k → 17%BNEI AKIVA OF CLEVELAND: $1k → 17%BEACHWOOD KOLLEL: $540 → 17%GROSS SCHECHTER DAY SCHOOL: $1k → 17%CHARITY FROM PTE: $12 → 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.
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.

72%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$808k · 10 repeat orgs$321k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2017, 2 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2017 (too recent to call). Read against FY2017, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
14

Total granted

$808k
$321k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+37%
+59%

Still filing today

30%
21%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $12 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’24
Arts & CulturePhilanthropyReligionInternationalOther
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

  • CS
    CAMP STONE
    4× · 2017–2021 · $421k
  • GR
    GREEN ROAD SYNAGOGUE
    5× · 2017–2021 · $200k
  • FI
    FEURERSTEIN INSTITUTE
    2× · 2017–2018 · $85k

Funded once

  • FM
    FUCHS MIZRACHI SCHOOLSgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $246k · revenue +59%
  • MO
    MESIVTA OF WEST BLOOMFIELD
    one grant, 2019 · $16k
  • MO
    MESTIVA OF WEST BLOOMFIELD
    one grant, 2017 · $16k
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
Eastern European Jewish Heritage Foundation
Philanthropy
2
University of Judaism Foundation
—
3
Hillel Foundation at Miami University

Hillel at Miami University, the center of Jewish life on campus, seeks to engage, connect, and empower students to explore their Jewish identity creating a vibrant Jewish community and inspiring the next generation of Jewish leaders.

—
4
The Jewish Foundation of Cincinnati
Philanthropy
5
Greater Miami Hillel Foundation Inc

The mission of the organization is to enrich the lives of jewish undergraduate and graduate students so that they may enrich the jewish people and the world.

—
6
Flo & Morris Mizel Jewish Community Day School

Flo and morris mizel jewish community day school provides an outstanding educational program for pre k through 5th grade students. rooted in jewish traditions and values, the general studies and judiac studies curricula fosters critical…

Education
7
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
8
Foundation for Conservative Judiasm of South Florida
—
9
The Steinhardt Foundation for Jewish Life Inc
Religion
10
Joseph and Vera Zilber Family Foundation Inc
Philanthropy
11
Sherit Isroel
—
12
Torah Temimah Jerusalem

The school trains advanced talmudic scholars, enabling them to become high level teachers and religious leaders in israel and the united states using specific methodology combining traditional talmudic study with innovative learning…

Education
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 Central Fund of Israel. 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

9 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. 9 of the 27 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
8/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $4,250,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND+2 more: $28,000 · PhilanthropyCAMP STONE: $420,750 · OtherCAMP STONEFUCHS MIZRACHI SCHOOLS: $245,627 · OtherFUCHS MIZRACHI SCHOOLSGREEN ROAD SYNAGOGUE: $200,380 · OtherGREEN ROAD SYNAGOGUEFEURERSTEIN INSTITUTE: $85,410 · OtherFEURERSTEIN INSTITUTEPEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $36,000 · Other+16 more: $85,752 · Other+16 moreThe Maltz Museum of Jewish Heritage: $30,000 · Arts & CultureCentral Fund of Israel: $12,000 · InternationalGROSS SCHECHTER DAY SCHOOL: $1,000 · Religion
Philanthropy$4,278,000Other$1,073,919Arts & Culture$30,000International$12,000Religion$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND: $4,250,000 over 6y, 1.0% of budgetFUCHS MIZRACHI SCHOOLS: $245,627 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetThe Maltz Museum of Jewish Heritage: $30,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetMONTEFIORE FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INC: $13,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCentral Fund of Israel: $12,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHILLEL OF BROWARD AND PALM BEACH INC: $4,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetHEBREW ACADEMY OF CLEVELAND: $2,900 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGROSS SCHECHTER DAY SCHOOL: $1,000 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 JEWISH FEDERATION OF CLEVELAND ↗
  • Who funds FUCHS MIZRACHI SCHOOLS ↗
  • Who funds The Maltz Museum of Jewish Heritage ↗
  • Who funds MONTEFIORE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INC ↗
  • Who funds Central Fund of Israel ↗
  • Who funds HILLEL OF BROWARD AND PALM BEACH INC ↗
  • Who funds HEBREW ACADEMY OF CLEVELAND ↗
  • Who funds GROSS SCHECHTER DAY SCHOOL ↗

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.

Irving I Stone FoundationOH22.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Irving I Stone Foundation · The Albert B & Audrey G Ratner Family Foundation · The Kline Family Foundation · The Weiss Family Foundation · Richard Horvitz and Erica Hartman-Horvitz Foundation · Norman Spero Day School Endowment Fund · J David & Rebecca Heller Family Foundation · Marla & Joseph Shafran Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program

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 Sapirstein-Stone-Weiss Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Sapirstein-Stone-Weiss Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's 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
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 Sapirstein-Stone-Weiss Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Sapirstein-Stone-Weiss 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 27 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 2017, released 2017. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Sapirstein-Stone-Weiss’ filings →

    More from the funding graph