Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Steven and Danielle Kupferman 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.

$85k
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$18k
Largest
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 86% of STEVEN AND DANIELLE KUPFERMAN FAMILY 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.

02FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k10 grants · $39k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $47k
$5,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$611k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VARIOUS$17,742
Yachad Outreach Center$16,500
YOUNG ISRAEL OF CENTURY CITY$12,336
GINDI MAIMONIDES ACADEMY$8,330
Individual grant recipient$6,000
Friends of Chabad On Campus Inc$5,580
OPENDOR MEDIA$5,000
SHALHEVET SCHOOL$3,200
Hillel at Washington University$2,800
Individual grant recipient$2,600
SHARSHERET$1,800
THE WESTSIDE SHUL$1,685
BNEI AKIVA OF US CANADA$1,525
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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 97% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Yachad Outreach Center: $17k → 14%BNEI AKIVA OF US CANADA: $5k → 17%Hebron Fund Inc: $5k → 20%OPENDOR MEDIA: $5k → 13%Friends of Chabad On Campus Inc: $6k → 11%SHARSHERET: $2k → 7%YOUNG ISRAEL OF CENTURY CITY: $13k → 14%BNEI AKIVA OF US CANADA: $2k → 17%OPENDOR MEDIA: $5k → 13%Hillel at Washington University: $3k → 11%SHARSHERET: $1k → 7%YOUNG ISRAEL OF CENTURY CITY: $12k → 14%BNEI AKIVA OF US CANADA: $2k → 17%YOUNG ISRAEL OF CENTURY CITY: $12k → 14%Yachad Outreach Center: $11k → 14%YOUNG ISRAEL OF CENTURY CITY: $10k → 14%THE WESTSIDE SHUL: $9k → 14%YOUNG ISRAEL OF CENTURY CITY: $9k → 14%Mikvah Esther - LAMIKVAH: $6k → 14%YESHIVA UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHOOL OF L: $4k → 14%KEHILAT BNEI TORAH: $3k → 14%THE WESTSIDE SHUL: $2k → 14%YESHIVA UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHOOL OF L: $1k → 14%WEST COAST NCSY: $1k → 14%WEST COAST NCSY: $600 → 14%VARIOUS: $19k → 14%VARIOUS: $18k → 14%VARIOUS: $13k → 14%VARIOUS: $10k → 14%VARIOUS: $6k → 14%GINDI MAIMONIDES ACADEMY: $8k → 14%GINDI MAIMONIDES ACADEMY: $6k → 14%GINDI MAIMONIDES ACADEMY: $6k → 14%GINDI MAIMONIDES ACADEMY: $4k → 14%GINDI MAIMONIDES ACADEMY: $4k → 14%SHALHEVET SCHOOL: $32k → 14%SHALHEVET SCHOOL: $30k → 14%SHALHEVET SCHOOL: $12k → 14%SHALHEVET SCHOOL: $11k → 14%SHALHEVET SCHOOL: $3k → 14%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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$304k · 11 repeat orgs$22k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +47% since the first grant, against +10% for the ones you funded once.

11 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
1

Total granted

$304k
$5k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+47%
+10%

Still filing today

18%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $17k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
ReligionPhilanthropyHealthOther

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

  • SS
    SHALHEVET SCHOOL
    5× · 2020–2024 · $89k
  • V
    VARIOUS
    5× · 2020–2024 · $65k
  • NC
    NATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG ISRAEL
    5× · 2020–2024 · $56k

Funded once

  • HF
    HEBRON FUND INC
    one grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue +10%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
04the grantee network

4 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2024.

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 20172024, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 4 of the 16 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
3/4
Grantees still filing
3/4
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

SHALHEVET SCHOOL — $88,697 · OtherSHALHEVET SCHOOLVARIOUS — $65,481 · OtherVARIOUSNATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG ISRAEL — $56,304 · OtherNATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG ISRAELYachad Outreach Center — $27,300 · OtherYachad Outreach CenterTHE WESTSIDE SHUL — $10,635 · Other+7 more — $31,705 · Other+7 moreGindi Maimonides Academy — $28,060 · ReligionGindi Maimoni…OPENDOR MEDIA INC — $10,000 · ReligionOPENDOR MEDIA…HEBRON FUND INC — $5,000 · PhilanthropySharsheret Inc — $2,837 · Health
Other$280,122Religion$38,060Philanthropy$5,000Health$2,837

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetOPENDOR MEDIA INC — $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetHEBRON FUND INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSharsheret Inc — $2,837 over 2y, 0.0% 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 Gindi Maimonides Academy
  • Who funds OPENDOR MEDIA INC
  • Who funds HEBRON FUND INC
  • Who funds Sharsheret 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 FundNY12.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Steven and Danielle Kupferman 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.

2024
2021222324
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 4%
  • Sharsheret Inc4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
typical government reliance, FY2024

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.

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 16 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph