Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

SMK Foundation

To encourage Jewish education

$200k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$124k
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 FY20192025.

Religion$559kEducation$74kHuman Services$53kPhilanthropy$14kInternational$10k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $77k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $124k
$40,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$40k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Magen Abraham of Brooklyn$123,624
Yesodot HaTorah$40,000
SMK Foundation$36,915
Magen Giborrim Inc$8,000
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 (FY24–24, $53k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%American Friends of Shifra Inc: $53k → 13%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.

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.

52%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$367k · 7 repeat orgs$343k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +8% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.

7 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
22

Total granted

$367k
$303k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
0%

Still filing today

57%
41%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $40k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’24’25
ReligionInternationalEducationHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther

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

  • MA
    MAGEN AVRAHAM OF BROOKLYN
    6× · 2019–2025 · $216k
  • SF
    SMK Foundation
    2× · 2024–2025 · $63k · revenue -50% · 34% of their budget
  • SC
    SEPHARDIC CONGREGATION OF HAR HA-LEBANON
    4× · 2019–2023 · $24k

Funded once

  • AF
    American Friends of Shifra Inc
    one grant, 2024 · $53k · revenue 0%
  • OG
    OTHER GRANTS LESS THAN 5000 EACH
    one grant, 2019 · $48k
  • GC
    GEMILOS CHASODIM CHASDEI MOSHE
    2× · 2022–2023 · $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
American Friends of Amshinover Yeshiva Jerusalem Inc

Support of religious schools in Israel

International
2
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
3
American Friends of Heichal Yerushalayim Inc

The funding of heichal yerushalayim yeshiva(religious shcool) to facilitate and promote judaic studies.

Youth Development
4
American Friends of Yeshiva Gedolah Matisyahu Inc

To award scholarships and grants to students from the United States attending Yeshivas Gedolah Matisyahu in the State of Israel

Education
5
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
6
American Friends of Yeshivat Nachalat Yossef

The organization will provide financial assistance to educational institutions that promote the observance of the jewish religion, its laws and traditions, and sacred texts, including yeshivat nachalat yossef, located in jerusalem, israel.

Religion
7
American Friends of Yeshiva Ner Aharon

The organization's primary activity is that of raising funds primarily for distribution to israeli institutions of higher learning. the funds may be distributed to other institutions organized exclusively for religious, charitable and…

Religion
8
Ohr Olam Corp

publish religious books

Religion
9
American Friends of Yeshivat Hakotel Inc

To support religious, charitable, scientific, literary and/or educational programs

Education
10
American Friends of Yeshivat Chochmat Shlomo

Charity

Religion
11
American Friends of Kol Yehuda Inc

Jewish Religious charitable Educational and scientific studies

Religion
12
American Friends of Amaleh Shel Torah Inc

None

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Friends of Rabbinical College Netiv Hadaat Inc and the most unlike its peers is Hebron Fund Inc. 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 24 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%7%<5yr16%7%5–10yr21%26%10–20yr23%30%20–35yr13%22%35–55yr5%7%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%8%<5yr16%11%5–10yr21%43%10–20yr23%24%20–35yr13%9%35–55yr5%5%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 8% 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%0/29
the rest of the field
11%
1,808/15,866

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.

04the grantee network

14 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. 14 of the 30 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/14
Grantees still filing
6/14
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

MAGEN AVRAHAM OF BROOKLYN — $216,071 · OtherMAGEN AVRAHAM OF BROOKLYNOTHER GRANTS LESS THAN 5000 EACH — $48,077 · OtherOTHER GRANTS LESS THAN 5000 EACHYESODOT HATORAH — $40,000 · OtherYESODOT HATORAHGEMILOS CHASODIM CHASDEI MOSHE — $36,000 · OtherGEMILOS CHASODIM CHASDEI MOSHESEPHARDIC CONGREGATION OF HAR HA-LEBANON — $23,789 · OtherBET YAAKOV OROT SARAH INC — $20,830 · OtherYESHIVA KOL YAAKOV — $18,000 · OtherATERET TORAH CENTER — $18,000 · Other+8 more — $58,368 · Other+8 moreSMK Foundation — $62,577 · ReligionSMK FoundationMAGEN GIBORRIM INC — $14,000 · ReligionMAGEN GIBORRIM IN…YESHIVAT OHEL TORAH — $12,517 · ReligionYESHIVAT OHEL TOR…YESHIVAT DARCHE ERES INC — $10,101 · ReligionYESHIVAT DARCHE E…KEREN YOM TOV INC — $7,200 · ReligionKEREN YOM TOV INCFRIENDS OF MOSDOT NAHALAT YTZHAQ — $5,000 · ReligionAmerican Friends of Shifra Inc — $53,000 · Human ServicesAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YIRGUN YRA — $10,000 · InternationalChabad Lubavitch Hospitality Center Eshel Hachnosas Orchim — $6,000 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF SUCATH DAVID INC — $6,000 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF ATERET COHANIM INC — $5,000 · InternationalHKY KOL YAAKAB INC — $17,200 · EducationAMERICAN FRIENDS OF RABBINICAL COLLEGE NETIV HADAAT INC — $8,500 · EducationHEBRON FUND INC — $14,000 · Philanthropy
Other$479,135Religion$111,395Human Services$53,000International$27,000Education$25,700Philanthropy$14,000

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 budgetSMK Foundation — $62,577 over 2y, 34% of budgetAmerican Friends of Shifra Inc — $53,000 over 1y, 5.2% of budgetHKY KOL YAAKAB INC — $17,200 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetMAGEN GIBORRIM INC — $14,000 over 3y, 7.4% of budgetHEBRON FUND INC — $14,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetYESHIVAT OHEL TORAH — $12,517 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetYESHIVAT DARCHE ERES INC — $10,101 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YIRGUN YRA — $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF RABBINICAL COLLEGE NETIV HADAAT INC — $8,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetChabad Lubavitch Hospitality Center Eshel Hachnosas Orchim — $6,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF SUCATH DAVID INC — $6,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetFRIENDS OF MOSDOT NAHALAT YTZHAQ — $5,000 over 2y, 0.9% 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 SMK Foundation
  • Who funds American Friends of Shifra Inc
  • Who funds HKY KOL YAAKAB INC
  • Who funds MAGEN GIBORRIM INC
  • Who funds HEBRON FUND INC
  • Who funds YESHIVAT OHEL TORAH
  • Who funds YESHIVAT DARCHE ERES INC
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YIRGUN YRA
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF RABBINICAL COLLEGE NETIV HADAAT INC
  • Who funds KEREN YOM TOV INC
  • Who funds Chabad Lubavitch Hospitality Center Eshel Hachnosas Orchim
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF SUCATH DAVID INC
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF MOSDOT NAHALAT YTZHAQ
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF ATERET COHANIM 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.

Jewish Communal FundNY37.3× affinity23 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · The Howard Hoffman & Sons Foundation Inc · The Amin and Lillian Adjmi Foundation · The Ojc Fund · Keren Yom Tov Inc · Mary & Abe Sutton Foundation · Marbeh Shalom Foundation Inc · The Setton Foundation · Ohel Rachel Ve Leah Foundation Inc · Mattan Basseter Inc · The Maj Franco Family Charitable 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 SMK 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 · 00%3%10%23%40%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report 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, 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 SMK Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to SMK 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 30 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph