· Private foundation
The House of Ruach
THE HOUSE OF RUACH IS COMMITTED TO CREATING A WORLD IN WHICH GOD WOULD CHOOSE TO LIVE.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k9 grants · $14k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $73k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| LANTOS FOUNDATION | $50,000 |
| JEWISH COLLABORATIVE AT ORANGE COUNTY | $20,000 |
| RCCS ROFEH CHOLIM CANCER SOCIETY | $18,000 |
| CHABAD JEWISH CENTER OF SOUTH HUNTINGTON BEACH | $15,000 |
| AMERICAN MUSLIM & MULTIFAITH WOMENS EMPOWERMENT COUNCIL (AMMWEC) | $10,000 |
| B'NAI BRITH YOUTH ORGANIZATION | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $3,600 |
| DONORSCHOOSEORG | $2,655 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,580 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,500 |
| BNAI DAVID JUDEA CONGREGATION | $616 |
| Individual grant recipient | $561 |
| Individual grant recipient | $518 |
| JEWISH NATIONAL FUND | $360 |
| Individual grant recipient | $180 |
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 (FY21–25, $136k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 12% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +736% since the first grant, against -5% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $46k 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
- THThe Hecht Trauma Institute3× · 2020–2022 · $451k · revenue +736% · 100% of their budget
- LFLANTOS FOUNDATION2× · 2024–2025 · $100k
- COCHABAD OF SOUTH HUNTINGTON BEACH2× · 2022–2023 · $47k
Funded once
- CECALPAK EDUCATION SERVICES LIMITEDone grant, 2021 · $119k · revenue -70% · 59% of their budget
- CECALPAK EDUCATION SERVICESone grant, 2022 · $116k
- M2MADE 2 CHANGE THE WORLD FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $100k · revenue -98% · 97% of their budget
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 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…
AJC's mission is to enhance the wellbeing of the Jewish people and Israel, and to advance human rights and democratic values in the United States and around the world. In pursuit of this mission, AJC advances democratic principles, fights…
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…
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,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Birthright Israel Foundation and the most unlike its peers is American Muslim & Multifaith Women. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
14 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. 14 of the 38 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 The Hecht Trauma Institute ↗
- Who funds CALPAK EDUCATION SERVICES LIMITED ↗
- Who funds MADE 2 CHANGE THE WORLD FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ROFEH CHOLIM CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds American Muslim & Multifaith Women ↗
- Who funds JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF ORANGE COUNTY ↗
- Who funds PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds DELTA GAMMA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ALPHA EPSILON PI FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DONORSCHOOSEORG ↗
- Who funds BIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds JEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC ↗
- Who funds SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER 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.
Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 The House of Ruach 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 The House of Ruach?
Find your warmest path to The House of Ruach 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.