· Private foundation
Irving and Bernice Singer 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
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 61% of IRVING AND BERNICE SINGER 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.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $137
- $10k–50k1 grant · $45k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| TEMPLE ISRAEL | $44,971 |
| TEMPLE ISRAEL | $137 |
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 (FY17–22, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 72% 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 +67% since the first grant, against +36% for the ones you funded once.
71 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2024, 71 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, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $45k 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
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM2× · 2019–2023 · $501k · revenue +252%
- WTWESTCHESTER TORAH ACADEMY5× · 2017–2021 · $13k · revenue +44%
- YHYESHIVA HAR TORAH6× · 2017–2022 · $8k · revenue +90%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $50k
- SLSTEPHEN LILLIAN SINGER DONOR ADVISEone grant, 2023 · $50k
- IRIM R AND J SINGER CHARITABLE FOUNDAone grant, 2023 · $50k
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.
Religious School
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…
To promote and support jewish religious charitable and educational activities in israel & usa.
To support, benefit, and assist yeshivat netiv hadaat- jerusalem
To promote, benefit, and support Jewish religious, charitable & educational activities in Israel and the USA.
Offering jewish adults a personal connection to judaism,fostering a sense of belonging to the greater jewishcommunity, and building bridges between jews of allbackgrounds. to date, over 74,000 men and women from 39countries have been…
Support of tzohar-a school for special needs children located in israel
To operate a school in the tradition of the orthodox jewish faith.
Our vision is to reignite the zionist spirit and meet the needs of jewish civilization in the twenty-first century by connecting people around the world through the vibrancy and creativity of contemporary israeli culture.
To promote, benefit, and support jewish educational activities in israel
Jewish educational programs
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 Charity Global Inc. 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 34 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) — 1% 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.
59 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. 59 of the 158 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 AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM ↗
- Who funds WESTCHESTER TORAH ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds BIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NEW ENGLAND HEBREW ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF NEW HAMPSHIRE DBA JEWISH FEDERATION OF NEW HAMPSHIRE ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA HAR TORAH ↗
- Who funds THE BRIDGE ACADEMY INC ↗
- Who funds MOORE CENTER SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA KETER TORAH INC ↗
- Who funds YOUNG ISRAEL OF MARGATE ↗
- Who funds JACK M BARRACK HEBREW ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds AISH CAMPUS BOSTON 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: Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · Joseph and Rae Gann Charitable Foundation · New Hampshire Charitable Foundation · Eastern Bank Foundation · Fidelity Foundation · The Rebecca and Jeffrey Singer Charitable Foundation · Southern New Hampshire University · Norwin S and Elizabeth N Bean Foundati · The Beker Foundation · The Harold Grinspoon Foundation · United Jewish Appeal-Federation of Jewish Philanthropies of New York Inc
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 Irving and Bernice Singer 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- New England Hebrew Academy — 10% of income from government
- Yeshiva Keter Torah Inc — 8% of income from government
- Sharsheret Inc — 4% of income from government
- The Grammar School Inc — 4% of income from government
- Young Israel of Margate — 3% of income from government
- Jewish Family & Children's Service Inc — 1% of income from government
- Americares Foundation Inc — 0% of income from government
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 Irving and Bernice Singer Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Irving and Bernice Singer 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.