· Private foundation
The Jake and Goldie Silverman 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $5k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $40k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $65k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Echoing Hope Ranch | $65,000 |
| COMMUNITY FOOD BANK | $20,000 |
| Chabad of Sierra Vista | $10,000 |
| CONGREGATION ANSHEI ISRAEL | $10,000 |
| Tucson Jewish Community Center | $5,000 |
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 (FY24–25, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% 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.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 13% of The Jake and Goldie Silverman Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 98% of the giving stays in AZ; read by stated purpose it is 86% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
9 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 1 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, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k 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
- EHECHOING HOPE RANCH9× · 2017–2025 · $700k · revenue +173%
- TATUCSON ACADEMY2× · 2017–2018 · $105k
- THTUCSON HEBREW ACADEMY2× · 2020–2021 · $45k · revenue -3%
Funded once
- AOACADEMY OF TUCSON HIGH SCHOOLone grant, 2019 · $45k
- CDCASA DE LOS NINOSone grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue -17%
- RTROCK THE SPECTRUM FOUNDATIONone grant, 2022 · $3k
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.
Ads is a day treatment program designed to aid in personal empowerment and career training for young adults with cognitive disabilities. our mission is to transition young adults with disabilities to independent living and community…
New vista is committed to providing people of all ages with intellectual and developmental disabilities, equitable opportunities, and supported living arrangements so that they may experience life to the fullest.
To provide children and youth in arizona a safe environment, free from abuse and neglect, by creating strong and successful families.
To provide aquatics programming for all ages and levels of swimmers.
Codac provides tools, support and services to individuals, families, and communities so they may live with dignity, free from the harmful effects of mental illness, substance use disorders and trauma.
To advance hope, healing and the best healthcare for children and their families.
To provide services to the elderly and disabled in the form of congregate and home delivered meals, housekeeping services, in-home nursing care, home health aides, and other services.
Our mission is continually to improve the quality of life for the people we serve in collaboration with our diverse communities in a respectful, caring, culturally sensitive manner. The organization provides behavioral health services for…
Impact of southern arizona is a private non-profit volunteer based organization which empowers southern arizonans with the resources required to pursue a stabilized and enhanced quality of life.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Casa De Los Ninos and the most unlike its peers is Echoing Hope Ranch. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
9 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. 9 of the 16 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 ECHOING HOPE RANCH ↗
- Who funds TUCSON HEBREW ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds Community Food Bank Inc ↗
- Who funds TUCSON JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds DUEL VOLLEYBALL INC ↗
- Who funds CASA DE LOS NINOS ↗
- Who funds MOBILE MEALS OF SOUTHERN ARIZONA INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN ARIZONA GOLDEN RETRIEVER RESCUE ↗
- Who funds BEADS OF COURAGE INC DBA CENTER FOR ARTS IN NURSING ↗
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: Community Foundation for Southern Arizona · Arizona Community Foundation · The Hs Lopez Family Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Jake and Goldie Silverman 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 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 Jake and Goldie Silverman Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Jake and Goldie Silverman 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.