Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Sf 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.

$28k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$12k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Religion$1.2MPhilanthropy$143kHuman Services$15kEducation$11kInternational$5k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k9 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $12k
$1,800
Median grant
2
States reached
$332k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$12,000
CONG KOLLEL BNEI YESHIVOS$4,180
Individual grant recipient$2,000
EZRAS YISROEL$2,000
CHESED L'AVRAHAM$1,800
Individual grant recipient$1,500
MISC- UNDER 1000$1,020
LEV L'ACHIM$1,000
CONG BAIS MOSHE SHMIEL$1,000
MOSDOS BOTOSHAN$1,000
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 (FY17–21, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, 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%YASHAR COALITION: $10k → 17%AVIHEM: $4k → 20%AVIHEM: $1k → 20%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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 26 repeat orgs$192k to everyone else

26 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 24 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
43

Total granted

$1.2M
$171k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+13%
+26%

Still filing today

23%
14%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 22% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $21k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
ReligionPhilanthropyHuman ServicesEducationInternationalOther
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

  • MR
    Mosdos Rabbainu Nachum Meshadyk
    7× · 2017–2024 · $255k · revenue +252%
  • BA
    BETH ABA TRUST
    7× · 2018–2024 · $159k · revenue +2%
  • SR
    SHUVU RETURN INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $143k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • MY
    MESIVTA YESHIVA CHAIM BERLIN
    one grant, 2018 · $36k
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF YESHIVA HARAN INC
    one grant, 2017 · $18k
  • YC
    YASHAR COALITION INC
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
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
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
2
Shaare Mordechai Inc

The organization's primary mission is charitable and religious in nature, supporting judaic and rabbinical education by providing financial assistance to institutions of jewish learning, currently through grants to shaare mordechai in…

Religion
3
Yeshiva Tiferes Boruch

A jewish secondary school which seeks to inculcate its students with high character and religious values to produce future religious leaders

—
4
Yeshivah Beth Israel Tifereth Menachem Foundation

To provide support to jewish religious education in israel and around the world, and provide financial assistance to and on behalf of yeshivah beth israel tifereth menachem.

Education
5
Yeshiva Toras Chaim of Greater Miami Inc

To operate a religious school for high school and post high school students.

Education
6
Yeshiva Gedola Na'os Yaakov

A post-secondary school offering an educational program in talmudic study

Education
7
Friends of Yeshiva Beer Abraham

Furtherance of jewish education

Religion
8
Toras Chaim Development Company Inc

Provide a building for a religious school.

Education
9
Keren Hayeshivot Trust

Keren hayeshivot trust supports religious institutions of higher education in the united states and israel to raise the level of torah and halachic observance in the sephardic orthodox jewish community.

Philanthropy
10
Keren Hayeshivot Fund Inc

Keren hayeshivot fund supports religious institutions of higher education in the united states and israel to raise the level of torah and halachic observance in the sephardic orthodox jewish community.

Philanthropy
11
Taharusam Inc

To promote authentic orthodox judaisim by helping fund jewish causes worldwide.

Philanthropy
12
Yeshiva Knesseth Yisroel

To provide financial support to the yeshiva knesseth yisroel institution, its rabbis, and students, and lend support to other religious institutions in israel and around the world, with the goal of furthering jewish values among the jewish…

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Vaad Harabbanim L'inyanei Tzeduka Inc; the most unlike its peers is Lakewood Cheder School Inc. 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

15 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. 15 of the 77 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/15
Grantees still filing
12/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONG KOLLEL BNEI YESHIVOS: $174,030 · OtherCONG KOLLEL BNEI YESHIVOSMISC: $117,443 · OtherMISCAMER FR YESHIVA ATERET HATORAH: $69,900 · OtherAMER FR YESHIVA ATERET HATORAHYESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD: $53,000 · OtherYESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUDYAD ELIEZER: $52,500 · OtherYAD ELIEZERMESIVTA YESHIVA CHAIM BERLIN: $36,000 · OtherNECHOMAS YISROEL: $32,500 · Other+57 more: $275,720 · Other+57 moreBETH ABA TRUST: $158,600 · PhilanthropyBETH ABA TRUSTSHUVU RETURN INC: $143,000 · PhilanthropySHUVU RETURN INCMosdos Rabbainu Nachum Meshadyk: $254,500 · ReligionMosdos Rabbainu Nachum…TALMUD TORAH CHOCHMAS SHLOMO: $19,800 · ReligionTALMUD TORAH CHOCHMAS …+4 more: $7,220 · ReligionYASHAR COALITION INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesAVIHEM INC: $4,600 · Human ServicesYESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD: $10,000 · EducationLAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC: $1,000 · EducationKOLEL CHIBAS JERUSALEM: $1,500 · International
Other$811,093Philanthropy$301,600Religion$281,520Human Services$14,600Education$11,000International$1,500

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMosdos Rabbainu Nachum Meshadyk: $254,500 over 7y, 2.1% of budgetBETH ABA TRUST: $158,600 over 7y, 2.4% of budgetSHUVU RETURN INC: $143,000 over 8y, 0.5% of budgetTALMUD TORAH CHOCHMAS SHLOMO: $19,800 over 2y, 3.8% of budgetAVIHEM INC: $4,600 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF KUPAT HA'IR: $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetVAAD HARABBANIM L'INYANEI TZEDUKA INC: $1,720 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKOLEL CHIBAS JERUSALEM: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC: $1,000 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 Mosdos Rabbainu Nachum Meshadyk ↗
  • Who funds BETH ABA TRUST ↗
  • Who funds SHUVU RETURN INC ↗
  • Who funds TALMUD TORAH CHOCHMAS SHLOMO ↗
  • Who funds YASHAR COALITION INC ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD ↗
  • Who funds TORAH SCHOOLS FOR ISRAEL ↗
  • Who funds AVIHEM INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF KUPAT HA'IR ↗

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.

The Ojc FundNY31.7× affinity16 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · The Basch Family Foundation · The Jmg Foundation · The Jimmy and Berta Khezrie Charitable Foundation · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · Donors Fund Inc · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Joseph Chehebar Family Foundation · The Fishoff Family Foundation · The Adjmi-Dwek 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 Sf Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Sf Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 6%
  • Yeshiva Shaar Hatalmud: 6% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
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 Sf Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Sf 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 77 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 Sf’s filings →

More from the funding graph