How much did THE DAY CHARITABLE TRUST grant in FY2021?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 74% of THE DAY CHARITABLE TRUST’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

educationjewishjusticeisrael

2019

jewishisraelsocialhillel

2020

jewishhillelsocial

2021

—

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2021 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$3,027,390

Median grant

States reached

Total assets

Largest grants

FIDELITY CHARITABLE GIFT FUND$3,027,390

02The need

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 (FY17–19, $59k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16% — the area typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — 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.

50%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$3.6M · 37 repeat orgs$3.5M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +70% since the first grant, against +8% for the ones you funded once.

37 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2021, 37 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$3.6M

$498k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+70%

+8%

Still filing today

41%

33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.0M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationHuman ServicesPhilanthropyRecreation & SportsCivil RightsInternationalOther

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

HC
HEBREW COLLEGE
4× · 2017–2020 · $1.2M · revenue +22%
CR
CAMP RAMAH IN NEW ENGLAND
4× · 2017–2020 · $89k · revenue +89%
CP
COURAGEOUS PARENTS NETWORK
4× · 2017–2020 · $85k · revenue +72%

Funded once

HK
HARVARD KENNEDY SCHOOL
one grant, 2017 · $115k
HU
HARVARD UNIVERSITY-KENNEDY SCHOOL
one grant, 2019 · $100k
RC
ROOT CAUSE INSTITUTE INC
one grant, 2017 · $31k · revenue -22%

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.

Hillel Jewish University Center

To enrich the lives of jewish students so that they may enrich the jewish people and the world.

—

Hillel Foundation of Cambridge Inc

Harvard hillel is a jewish home on campus that seeks to: -welcome students to experience the variety of jewish identity, tradition, practice, values, culture, and community. -inspire and enable jewish connection, celebration, and action.…

Religion

Network of Jewish Human Service

Advances efforts in best practices, innovation, research and partnerships to strengthen non-profit jewish human service agencies so they can better serve their communities.

Human Services

The Shalom Hartman Institute of

A pluralistic center of research and education deepening and elevating the quality of jewish life in israel and north america.

International

Avodah the Jewish Service Corps Inc

Avodah develops lifelong jewish social justice leaders to work for a more just and equitable world.

Community Improvement

American Friends of Rabbinical College

To support, benefit, and assist yeshivat netiv hadaat- jerusalem a recognized tax exempt religious educational institute.

Education

Hillel At the George Washington

Enriching the lives of jewish students.

—

Yeshivat Chovevei Torah Rabbinical

Yeshivat chovevei torah (yct) rabbinical school is a four year full time program. students are offered a core curriculum of traditional jewish subjects as well as important classes on leadership and pastoral counseling.

Education

Jewish Electorate Institute

Surveys, interprets, reports, and educates the public about the perspectives, voting behaviors, and motivations of the american jewish electorate. jei undertakes all its work and reports its findings, without bias or favor concerning any…

Civil Rights

Hillel At the University of Vermont

The uvm hillel mission is to enrich the lives of jewish students at the university of vermont so that they may enrich the jewish people and the world.

—

Abraham Joshua Heschel School

The abraham joshua heschel school is an independent jewish day school (continued on schedule o)which includes students from a wide range of jewish backgrounds, practices and beliefs.

Education

Jews United for Justice Inc

To lead washington and baltimore area jews to act on our shared jewish values by pursuing justice and equity in our local community.

Religion

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Family & Children's Service Inc and the most unlike its peers is Israel Lacrosse Association 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 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 10% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

4%1/27

the rest of the field

10%

4,847/49,557

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.

05the grantee network

26 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

24/26

Grantees still filing

17/26

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$5,408,190Education$1,291,700Recreation & Sports$114,250Health$85,000Arts & Culture$78,600Civil Rights$75,000Human Services$68,300

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.

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.

Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston IncMA33.7× affinity14 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · Boston Foundation Inc · The Shimon Ben Joseph Foundation · The Harold Grinspoon Foundation · Jewish Federation of Greater · Covenant Foundation · Joseph and Rae Gann Charitable · The Klarman Family Foundation · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan · Jewish Community Federation of San · 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 organisation THE DAY CHARITABLE TRUST 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

10get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: JEWISH FARM SCHOOL.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

high risk

4 years of Form 990 filings, no recent filing.

Legal standing

medium risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 454100890 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on JEWISH FARM SCHOOL, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
FlagSustained operations— No recent filing on record.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 15% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to The Day Charitable Trust?

Find your warmest path to The Day Charitable Trust through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

THE DAY CHARITABLE TRUST

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

26 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Day Charitable Trust?

More from the funding graph

THE DAY CHARITABLE TRUST

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

26 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Day Charitable Trust?

More from the funding graph