Skip to content
Tampa Jccfederation Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Tampa Jccfederation Inc

Our mission is to strengthen the health, education, culture and welfare of our community; to enrich jewish life in the tampa bay area; and to connect with and support the people of israel and the global jewish community.

$1.1M
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$442k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$11MPhilanthropy$1.1MHuman Services$752kEducation$619kCivil Rights$48k
02FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $783,051, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,110,432 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $327,381 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $44k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $296k
  • $250k+1 grant · $442k
$91,327
Median grant
3
States reached
$25M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JCC CHARITABLE PROJECT INC$442,344
JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA$124,015
TAMPA JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES$91,327
HILLEL ACADEMY OF TAMPA$81,000
HILLELS OF THE FLORIDA SUNCOAST$24,500
FOUNDATION OF JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE$19,865
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, $752k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%TAMPA JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $100k → 13%TAMPA JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $100k → 13%TAMPA JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $95k → 13%TAMPA JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $91k → 13%TAMPA JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $91k → 13%TAMPA JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $91k → 13%TAMPA JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $91k → 13%TAMPA JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $90k → 13%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.

Grants abroad, by region: $100k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Middle East and North Africa$100k · 100% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: JAFI COMMITMENT

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$13M · 6 repeat orgs$15k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
1

Total granted

$13M
$15k

Still filing today

100%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
ReligionHuman ServicesEducationOther
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

  • JC
    JCC CHARITABLE PROJECT INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $11M · revenue +50% · 38% of their budget
  • TJ
    TAMPA JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $752k · revenue +34%
  • HS
    HILLEL SCHOOL OF TAMPA INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $619k · revenue +66%

Funded once

  • CL
    CHABAD LUBAVITCH OF PUERTO RICO INC
    one grant, 2018 · $15k
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
04the grantee network

7 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 7 of the 8 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
6/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JCC CHARITABLE PROJECT INC: $10,849,036 · ReligionJCC CHARITABLE PROJECT INC+1 more: $158,920 · ReligionTHE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $1,090,814 · PhilanthropyTHE JEWIS…TAMPA JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES INC: $751,562 · Human ServicesHILLEL SCHOOL OF TAMPA INC: $618,896 · EducationHILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS D/B/A HILLELS OF THE FLORIDA SUNCOAST: $149,723 · OtherJEWISH COUNCIL FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS INC: $48,100 · OtherCHABAD LUBAVITCH OF PUERTO RICO INC: $15,000 · Other
Religion$11,007,956Philanthropy$1,090,814Human Services$751,562Education$618,896Other$212,823

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetJCC CHARITABLE PROJECT INC: $10,849,036 over 9y, 38% of budgetTHE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC: $1,090,814 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetTAMPA JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES INC: $751,562 over 9y, 25% of budgetHILLEL SCHOOL OF TAMPA INC: $618,896 over 9y, 2.9% of budgetHILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $158,920 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetHILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS D/B/A HILLELS OF THE FLORIDA SUNCOAST: $149,723 over 9y, 5.7% of budgetJEWISH COUNCIL FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS INC: $48,100 over 5y, 0.5% 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 JCC CHARITABLE PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds THE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds TAMPA JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds HILLEL SCHOOL OF TAMPA INC ↗
  • Who funds HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE ↗
  • Who funds HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS D/B/A HILLELS OF THE FLORIDA SUNCOAST ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH COUNCIL FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS 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.

Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA5.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Tampa Jccfederation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Tampa Jccfederation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • Jcc Charitable Project Inc: 7% of income from government
  • Hillel School of Tampa Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
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.

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

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $743k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Tampa Jccfederation’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