Skip to content
The Isaac Sitt Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Isaac Sitt Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$504k
Granted FY2025still arriving
63
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$111k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Religion$312kHuman Services$205kHealth$98kEducation$81kArts & Culture$48kFood & Nutrition$30kInternational$28kYouth Development$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 63 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k47 grants · $99k
  • $10k–50k15 grants · $294k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $111k
$1,800
Median grant
1
States reached
$33k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MAGEN DAVID OF YESHIVAH SCHOOL$111,000
MOISE SAFRA CENTER$49,115
SEPHARDIC ACADEMY OF MANHATTAN$36,450
CONGREGATION BNEI YESHIVA$31,600
CHABAD OF THE SHORE$25,600
THE SPECIAL CHILDREN'S CENTER$25,000
SAFE FOUNDATION INC$20,000
LARCHWOOD SYNAGOGUE INC$19,800
SEPHARDIC HERITAGE MUSEUM$13,500
Individual grant recipient$12,600
MEKUDESHET$10,501
YAD YOSEF$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
RANDIS CARE INC$10,000
NEW YORK CANCER FOUNDATION$10,000
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 (FY23–25, $110k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, 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%MOISE SAFRA CENTER: $37k → 17%MOISE SAFRA CENTER: $25k → 17%MOISE SAFRA CENTER: $10k → 17%MOISE SAFRA CENTER: $10k → 17%BELEV ECHAD: $5k → 17%MOISE SAFRA CENTER: $4k → 17%MOISE SAFRA CENTER: $3k → 17%KETER SHLOMO FOUNDATION: $3k → 17%KETER SHLOMO FOUNDATION: $3k → 17%BONEI OLAM: $2k → 17%AHAVA BABY INC: $2k → 17%MOISE SAFRA CENTER: $2k → 17%MOISE SAFRA CENTER: $1k → 17%MOISE SAFRA CENTER: $1k → 17%BEER MIRIAM CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $1k → 17%MOISE SAFRA CENTER: $501 → 17%AHAVA BABY INC: $501 → 17%MOISE SAFRA CENTER: $303 → 17%AHAVA BABY INC: $301 → 17%MOISE SAFRA CENTER: $202 → 17%MOISE SAFRA CENTER: $101 → 17%MOISE SAFRA CENTER: $101 → 17%MOISE SAFRA CENTER: $101 → 17%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.
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

72%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$976k · 44 repeat orgs$378k to everyone else

44 repeat relationships: 34 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 29 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

44
45

Total granted

$976k
$246k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+4%
+11%

Still filing today

32%
31%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $132k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesEducationReligionPhilanthropyYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • MS
    MOISE SAFRA COMMUNITY CENTER INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $154k · revenue +11%
  • SA
    SEPHARDIC ACADEMY OF MANHATTAN INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $93k · revenue +155%
  • SF
    SAFE FOUNDATION INC
    3× · 2022–2025 · $34k · revenue +4%

Funded once

  • MD
    Magen David of Yeshivah
    one grant, 2022 · $48k
  • CC
    CONGREGATION CHESED VEMES CHARITABLE TR
    one grant, 2023 · $23k
  • RS
    RAMAZ SCHOOL
    one grant, 2022 · $18k
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

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Sherit Isroel
—
2
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
3
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
4
Yad Yosef Foundation
Philanthropy
5
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Tzemach Yifroch Foundation
—
7
Tal Hashamayim Foundation
Religion
8
Gemilas Chesed Kramer Inc
Philanthropy
9
Zichron Chaim Meir Foundation
Philanthropy
10
Shaarei Halacha Inc
Philanthropy
11
Idf Memorial Foundation
Philanthropy
12
Israel Charitable Foundation Inc
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Moise Safra Community Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Mikvah Ltd. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

35 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. 35 of the 118 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
33/35
Grantees still filing
17/35
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MAGEN DAVID OF YESHIVAH SCHOOL: $231,315 · OtherMAGEN DAVID OF YESHIVAH SCHOOLTHE SPECIAL CHILDREN'S CENTER: $61,800 · OtherTHE SPECIAL CHILDREN'S CENTERMagen David of Yeshivah: $47,900 · OtherMagen David of YeshivahCONGREGATION BNEI YESHIVA: $36,800 · OtherSAFE FOUNDATION INC: $33,600 · OtherCHABAD OF THE SHORE: $31,000 · Other+89 more: $437,968 · Other+89 moreMOISE SAFRA COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $153,944 · Human ServicesMOISE SAFRA CO…KETER SHLOMO FOUNDATION INC: $10,400 · Human ServicesKETER SHLOMO F…+4 more: $11,252 · Human Services+4 moreSEPHARDIC ACADEMY OF MANHATTAN INC: $92,700 · EducationNew York University: $5,000 · Education+2 more: $751 · EducationNew York Cancer Foundation: $30,000 · HealthNew York Cancer Center Inc: $12,000 · HealthMONMOUTH MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION INC: $11,800 · HealthSIMHA ORGANIZATION INC: $7,900 · Health+3 more: $5,304 · HealthTHE SEPHARDIC HERITAGE MUSEUM INC: $61,700 · Arts & Culture+1 more: $1,800 · Arts & CultureSEPHARDIC COMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER INC: $41,701 · Youth DevelopmentDEAL SEPHARDIC YOUTH CENTER INC: $5,200 · Youth DevelopmentAmerican Friends of Migdal OHR: $1,800 · Youth DevelopmentTHE SEPHARDIC FOOD FUND INC: $20,400 · Food & Nutrition
Other$880,383Human Services$175,596Education$98,451Health$67,004Arts & Culture$63,500Youth Development$48,701Food & Nutrition$20,400

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMOISE SAFRA COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $153,944 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetTHE SEPHARDIC HERITAGE MUSEUM INC: $61,700 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetSEPHARDIC COMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER INC: $41,701 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetSAFE FOUNDATION INC: $33,600 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetNew York Cancer Foundation: $30,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetTHE SEPHARDIC FOOD FUND INC: $20,400 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetNew York Cancer Center Inc: $12,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMONMOUTH MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION INC: $11,800 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetKETER SHLOMO FOUNDATION INC: $10,400 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetRANDIS CARE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC: $9,553 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSIMHA ORGANIZATION INC: $7,900 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetBELEV ECHAD INC: $5,400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDEAL SEPHARDIC YOUTH CENTER INC: $5,200 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF SOROKA MEDICAL CENTER INC: $5,200 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNew York University: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAHAVA BABY INC: $2,802 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetBonei Olam Inc: $2,050 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $2,001 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAAGALIM INC: $1,800 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetKEREN YOM TOV INC: $1,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWIDOW AND HESED FUND: $1,800 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetRISING HEROES INC: $1,800 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetLUNG CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $1,503 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTREES 78 FOUNDATION: $1,200 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetBEER MIRIAM CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE MIKVAH LTD: $750 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAmerican Friends of EshelInc: $501 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetILAN HIGH SCHOOL: $250 over 1y, 0.0% 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 MOISE SAFRA COMMUNITY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds SEPHARDIC ACADEMY OF MANHATTAN INC ↗
  • Who funds THE SEPHARDIC HERITAGE MUSEUM INC ↗
  • Who funds SEPHARDIC COMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds SAFE FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds New York Cancer Foundation ↗
  • Who funds THE SEPHARDIC FOOD FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds New York Cancer Center Inc ↗
  • Who funds MONMOUTH MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds KETER SHLOMO FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds RANDIS CARE INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC ↗
  • Who funds SIMHA ORGANIZATION 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.

Jack Adjmi Family Fou…Jewish Communal FundThe Ralph S Gindi Fam…Albert & Melissa Sutt…Isaac & Marjorie Gind…The Howard Hoffman & …Abraham D & Annette C…Ralph J Harary Founda…N'Ve Shalom Foundatio…Reuben J Chehebar Cha…The Mamiye Foundation…David J Beyda Memoria…
Jack Adjmi Family Foundation IncNY44× affinity20 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · The Ralph S Gindi Family Foundation · Albert & Melissa Sutton Foundation · Isaac & Marjorie Gindi Foundation Inc · The Howard Hoffman & Sons Foundation Inc · Abraham D & Annette Cohen Foundation · Ralph J Harary Foundation Inc · N'Ve Shalom Foundation Inc · Reuben J Chehebar Charitable Trust Reuben J Chehebar Trustee · The Mamiye Foundation Inc · David J Beyda Memorial Foundation Inc

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 The Isaac Sitt Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Isaac Sitt Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Isaac Sitt Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Isaac Sitt 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.

    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 118 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Isaac Sitt’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