Skip to content
Sragowicz Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Sragowicz Foundation Inc

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.

$268k
Granted FY2024still arriving
28
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$110k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0190% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$938kInternational$237kArts & Culture$107kHuman Services$23kPhilanthropy$15kEducation$6kFood & Nutrition$2kHealth$1kOther$0
02FY2024 · 28 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k22 grants · $31k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $58k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $179k
$1,500
Median grant
3
States reached
$3.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MIGDAL OHR$110,000
THE SHUL OF BAL HARBOUR$69,336
CENTRAL FUND ISRAEL$20,000
CALIFORNIA CLUB CHABAD$18,000
PARTNERS FOR HAPPINESS$10,000
CHARITY EX FOUNDATION$10,000
CHABAD AT MIDTOWN$5,000
CHABAD LUBAVITCH OF DOMINICAN REPUBLIC$4,000
HEALING HEARTS$2,500
SIMCHA CONNECTION$2,360
FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH$2,000
TZOHAR$1,800
YALDEI SHLUCHEI HAREBBE$1,800
THE SURFSIDE MINYAN$1,500
CONG BNEI YECHIEL$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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–24, $12k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 59% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%SULAM: $1k → 8%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YAD ELIEZER INC: $180 → 11%SULAM: $1k → 8%SULAM: $1k → 8%SULAM: $1k → 8%SULAM: $1k → 8%MIAMI LIGHTHOUSE FOR THE BLIND: $180 → 15%BELEV ECHAD: $100 → 17%BNEI OLAM: $180 → 20%JEWISH COMMUNITY SERVICES: $2k → 15%JEWISH COMMUNITY SERVICES: $2k → 15%JEWISH COMMUNITY SERVICES: $1k → 15%JEWISH COMMUNITY SERVICES: $1k → 15%JEWISH COMMUNITY SERVICES: $860 → 15%JEWISH COMMUNITY SERVICES: $500 → 15%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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
NY
PA
NJ
CA
CO
MD
TN
FL
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.

70%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$974k · 33 repeat orgs$416k to everyone else

33 repeat relationships: 15 still active in FY2024, 18 since wound down; 13 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

33
53

Total granted

$974k
$269k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
+135%

Still filing today

36%
23%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 45% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $147k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesInternationalPhilanthropyReligionYouth DevelopmentArts & CultureOther
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

  • AF
    American Friends of Migdal OHR
    8× · 2017–2024 · $194k · revenue +102%
  • CF
    Central Fund of Israel
    2× · 2023–2024 · $40k · revenue +31%
  • JC
    JEWISH COMMUNITY SERVICES OF SOUTH FLORIDA INC
    6× · 2019–2024 · $7k · revenue +46%

Funded once

  • FF
    FLORIDA FRIENDS OF MIGDAL OHR
    one grant, 2017 · $100k
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF CHABAD OF DOMINICAN REPU
    one grant, 2021 · $56k
  • W
    WIZO
    one grant, 2018 · $18k
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
Sherit Isroel
—
2
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
3
Chasudim Foundation
—
4
Yad Yosef Foundation
Philanthropy
5
Tal Hashamayim Foundation
Religion
6
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
7
Chasdei Ish Foundation
Philanthropy
8
Shaarei Halacha Inc
Philanthropy
9
University of Judaism Foundation
—
10
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
11
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
12
Bais Yehuda Perach Rochel Foundation
Public Benefit
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Friends of Yad Eliezer; the most unlike its peers is The Falic Family Private Foundation. 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

27 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 27 of the 99 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
27/27
Grantees still filing
19/27
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SHUL OF BAL HARBOUR INC: $444,709 · OtherSHUL OF BAL HARBOUR INCMIGDAL OHR: $110,000 · OtherMIGDAL OHRFLORIDA FRIENDS OF MIGDAL OHR: $100,000 · OtherFLORIDA FRIENDS OF MIGDAL OHRCALIFORNIA CLUB CHABAD: $65,730 · OtherCALIFORNIA CLUB CHABADFRIENDS OF CHABAD OF DOMINICAN REPU: $56,000 · OtherSIMCHA CONNECTION INC: $49,910 · Other+72 more: $271,967 · Other+72 moreAmerican Friends of Migdal OHR: $193,860 · Youth DevelopmentAmerican Friend…+1 more: $1,000 · Youth DevelopmentCentral Fund of Israel: $40,000 · InternationalAdi Israel Foundation Inc: $1,540 · International+4 more: $2,020 · InternationalCHABAD ON CAMPUS INTERNATIONAL INC: $18,000 · ReligionBEIT CHABAD ALMAGRO INC: $4,720 · Religion+2 more: $860 · ReligionJEWISH COMMUNITY SERVICES OF SOUTH FLORIDA INC: $6,540 · Human ServicesSulam Inc: $5,000 · Human Services+4 more: $640 · Human ServicesCHARITYEX FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 · EducationFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $6,100 · Arts & CultureShearim Corp: $1,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$1,098,316Youth Development$194,860International$43,560Religion$23,580Human Services$12,180Education$10,000Arts & Culture$7,100

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAmerican Friends of Migdal OHR: $193,860 over 8y, 1.0% of budgetCentral Fund of Israel: $40,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHABAD ON CAMPUS INTERNATIONAL INC: $18,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCHARITYEX FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY SERVICES OF SOUTH FLORIDA INC: $6,540 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $6,100 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSulam Inc: $5,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetBEIT CHABAD ALMAGRO INC: $4,720 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetYaldei Shluchei Harebbe Special Needs Organization: $1,800 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAdi Israel Foundation Inc: $1,540 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE FALIC FAMILY PRIVATE FOUNDATION: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF CHABAD VOCATIONAL SCHOOLS INC: $1,360 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetShearim Corp: $1,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCHAI ARGENTINA INC: $1,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetTHE ALEPH INSTITUTE INC: $960 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTORAT CHESED TRUST: $680 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $460 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCORE OUTREACH FOUNDATION: $360 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetYISMACH MOSHE INC: $360 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YAD ELIEZER: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBonei Olam Inc: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMIAMI LIGHTHOUSE FOR THE BLIND AND VISUALLY IMPAIRED INC: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF RAMAT BET SHEMESH INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBELEV ECHAD INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJUST ONE LIFE INC: $100 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 American Friends of Migdal OHR ↗
  • Who funds Central Fund of Israel ↗
  • Who funds CHABAD ON CAMPUS INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
  • Who funds CHARITYEX FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH COMMUNITY SERVICES OF SOUTH FLORIDA INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC ↗
  • Who funds Sulam Inc ↗
  • Who funds Chabad Nicaragua Inc ↗
  • Who funds BEIT CHABAD ALMAGRO INC ↗

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.

Jewish Communal FundGreater Miami Jewish …Jack Adjmi Family Fou…Maon Noam IncThe Ejnra FoundationThe Russell & Ronalee…Nash Charity Foundati…Cross River Community…The Ojc FundZichron Foundation fo…The Hbag FoundationTargum Shlishi Inc Ar…
Jewish Communal FundNY33.8× affinity25 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Greater Miami Jewish Federation Inc · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Maon Noam Inc · The Ejnra Foundation · The Russell & Ronalee Galbut Family Foundation Inc · Nash Charity Foundation Inc · Cross River Community Foundation · The Ojc Fund · Zichron Foundation for Special Need · The Hbag Foundation · Targum Shlishi Inc Aryeh & Raquel Rubin Foundation

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 Sragowicz Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Sragowicz Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 70%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Jewish Community Services of South Florida Inc: 1% of income from government
  • Miami Lighthouse for the Blind and Visually Impaired Inc: 0% of income from government
  • The Aleph Institute Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
7get 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, 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 Sragowicz Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Sragowicz Foundation Inc 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 99 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Sragowicz’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