· Private foundation
Seymor & Pearl Greenstein Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 81% of SEYMOR & PEARL GREENSTEIN FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k26 grants · $65k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $43k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $18,900 |
| KOLLEL INSTITUTE--charity fund | $13,600 |
| Individual grant recipient | $10,000 |
| TZEDEKAH ENHANCEMENT PROJECT | $9,200 |
| KOLLEL INSTITUTE | $6,360 |
| Misc under 500 | $5,889 |
| JCS Kosher Food Bank | $5,500 |
| Aventura Shul | $5,320 |
| Yad EZRA | $5,100 |
| Hatzalah of Michign | $3,600 |
| FREE | $3,500 |
| Mesifta of Cincinnati | $3,000 |
| Ahavas Yisroel Charity Fund | $2,500 |
| Jewish Resource Center | $2,000 |
| Hatzalah of S Florida | $1,500 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $143k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 12% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
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
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +44% since the first grant, against -3% for the ones you funded once.
40 repeat relationships — 14 still active in FY2025, 26 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 32% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $73k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- YEYAD EZRA9× · 2017–2025 · $46k · revenue +42%
- DCDETROIT CHESED PROJECT4× · 2018–2021 · $31k · revenue +384%
- BOBonei Olam Inc9× · 2017–2025 · $15k · revenue +224%
Funded once
- YHYESHIVAT HEATID INCone grant, 2024 · $3k · revenue -3%
- TCTennafly Chabad Academyone grant, 2024 · $3k
- FHFARBER HEBREW DAY SCHOOL-YESHIVAL AKIVAone grant, 2022 · $2k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Ohr Yisrael is a religious institution that provides religious services and instruction to Rabbis and community members.
Religious Teaching
encourage and facilitate the observance of traditional orthodox Jewish practices around the world.
publish religious books
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Family Service and the most unlike its peers is Missouri Torah Institute. 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 18 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
16 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 16 of the 73 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 JARC ↗
- Who funds YAD EZRA ↗
- Who funds DETROIT CHESED PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Bonei Olam Inc ↗
- Who funds THE JEWISH DENTAL CLINIC ↗
- Who funds TOMCHEI SHABBOS OF FLORIDA ↗
- Who funds JEWISH RESOURCE CENTER ↗
- Who funds KADIMA ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE ↗
- Who funds MISSOURI TORAH INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds CINCINNATI HEBREW DAY SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds LEV LALEV INC ↗
- Who funds HATZALAH OF MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds YESHIVAT HEATID INC ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Ahavas Avraham Foundation · Borsand Family Foundation Inc · Edward and Norma Jean Meer Charitable Foundation · The Meer Family Foundation · David Kahan Family Foundation · United Jewish Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Alex Saltsman Family Foundation · Shari & Alon Friendship Foundation Inc · The Jerold and Ellen Minkin Family Foundation · Pappas Foundation Inc · Harold and Penny B Blumenstein Foundation Corporation
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 Seymor & Pearl Greenstein 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.
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.