· Private foundation
Steve and Janice Hefter Family 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $8k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $152k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $392k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CENTRAL FUND OF ISRAEL | $150,000 |
| AMERICAN ISRAEL EDUCATION FOUNDATION | $75,000 |
| JEWISH INSTITUTE FOR NATIONAL SECURITY OF AMERICA | $66,700 |
| FOUNDATION FOR THE DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACIES | $50,000 |
| STAND WITH US | $50,000 |
| THE LAWFARE PROJECT | $30,000 |
| AFRICAN MIDDLE EASTERN LEADERSHIP PROJECT (AMEL) | $25,000 |
| JEWISH UNITED FUND | $25,000 |
| NORTH SUBURBAN SYNAGOGUE BETH EL | $24,500 |
| FRIENDS OF OF THE ISRAELI DEFENSE FORCE | $15,000 |
| THE GIVING BACK FUND | $12,000 |
| FRIENDS OF ELNET | $10,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL FELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTIANS AND JEWS | $10,000 |
| SUNDANCE INSTITUTE | $5,000 |
| VARIOUS | $2,600 |
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 (FY23–23, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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 +55% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.
21 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k 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
- IEISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE5× · 2020–2024 · $659k · revenue +52%
- CFCentral Fund of Israel5× · 2020–2024 · $510k · revenue +101%
- JIJEWISH INSTITUTE FOR NATIONAL SECURITY OF AMERICA5× · 2020–2024 · $247k · revenue +50%
Funded once
- SFSCHOLARS FOR PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EASTgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue +72%
- ECEDWARD CHARLES FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue +70%
- FOFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INCgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $18k · revenue +63%
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.
The organization's mission is to engage in non partisan analysis of u.s. foreign policy in the middle east, with special emphasis on the middle east peace process, and to present policymakers in the united states, in the region and in the…
The organization seeks to reinforce the foundations of israel as a jewish and democratic state. it acts to promote programs to educate the israeli public on the importance of both values and to demonstrate how each contributes to and…
Educational information regarding Israel and the Middle East.
To strengthen israel's future in these areas: 1)providing new immigrants with assistance in a few key areas: representing them as they navigate government ministries and assisting them with their challenges as new immigrants to israel.…
Biu produces students who excel in the sciences, humanities, law, engineering, business & the arts.
The Impact Forum is an exclusive network of philanthropists. We are connecting philanthropists that support each others initiatives and collaborate to empower and meet with exceptional non-profit organizations to fight antisemitism,…
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…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Israel Education Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Abrahamic House. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 29 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
27 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. 27 of the 33 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 ISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Central Fund of Israel ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ISRAEL EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds JEWISH INSTITUTE FOR NATIONAL SECURITY OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds Foundation for the Defense of Democracies Inc ↗
- Who funds SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds THE AFRICAN MIDDLE EASTERN LEADERSHIP PROJECT ↗
- Who funds JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds ONE FAMILY FUND ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES ↗
- Who funds RAVINIA FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL FELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTIANS & JEWS INC ↗
- Who funds THE LAWFARE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF ELNET ↗
- Who funds COMMITTEE FOR ACCURACY IN MIDDLE EAST REPORTING IN AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds SCHOLARS FOR PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST ↗
- Who funds EDWARD CHARLES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Sundance Institute ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICA GIVES INC ↗
- Who funds ABRAHAMIC HOUSE ↗
- Who funds PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds THE GIVING BACK FUND ↗
- Who funds BELEV ECHAD INC ↗
- Who funds OPENDOR MEDIA INC ↗
- Who funds THE FOUNDATION FIGHTING BLINDNESS INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION ↗
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: Jewish Community Federation of San · Jewish Communal Fund · Libitzky Family Foundation · Jewish National Fund · Dallas Jewish Community Foundation · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan · Jewish Community Foundation of San Diego · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program
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 Steve and Janice Hefter Family 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Steve and Janice Hefter Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Steve and Janice Hefter Family 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.