Loading…
· Private foundation
TOM AND SARAH BORMAN FOUNDATION
This foundation does not accept unsolicited requests — it funds preselected organizations.
$113k
Granted FY2024
7
Grants
1
Communities
$106k
Largest
01What you fund
01
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 96% of TOM AND SARAH BORMAN FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.
02FY2024 · 7 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k6 grants · $7k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $106k
$1,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
- JEWISH FEDERATION OF METRO DETROIT$106,000
- ORCHARDS CHILDRENS SERVICES$2,000
- JEWISH WARS VETERANS OF THE USA$1,000
- OAKLAND COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION$1,000
- COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN$1,000
- HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL CENTER$1,000
- GROSSE POINTE ANIMAL ADOPTION SOCIETY$1,000
02The need
03
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.
show:
Your human-services grants (FY18–24, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8% — the area typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
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; 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
03Your edge
repeat funding
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.
96%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$773k · 13 repeat orgs$30k to everyone else
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +106% since the first grant, against -15% for the ones you funded once.
13 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
13
6
Total granted
$773k
$28k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+106%
-15%
Still filing today
38%
17%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
Arts & CultureHuman ServicesPhilanthropyAnimalsEducationOther
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
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN3× · 2018–2024 · $11k · revenue +106%- NYNATIONAL YIDDISH BOOK CENTER2× · 2018–2021 · $11k · revenue +119%
- OCORCHARDS CHILDRENS SERVICES4× · 2021–2024 · $5k · revenue +50%
Funded once
- ATAMERICAN TECHNION SOCIETYone grant, 2019 · $18k
- CSCONGREGATION SHAAREY ZEDEKone grant, 2018 · $5k
- JJARCone grant, 2018 · $2k · revenue -15%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
04Your field
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.
1
Jewish Community Foundation of
Jewish philanthropies of southern arizona (jpsa) is committed to achieving the full potential of jewish philanthropy, now and for future generations. comprised of jewish federation of southern arizona (jfsa or federation) and jewish…
Philanthropy
2
Jewish Community Foundation of
Philanthropic asset management and grantmaking to both jewish and secular charitable organizations.
Philanthropy
3
Jewish Community Alliance
To coordinate, promote, and support the Jewish philanthropic, benevolent, educational, and communal activities in Southern Maine. To foster, develop, and encourage agencies as will best promote the welfare of this community.
Philanthropy
4
Jewish Community Relations Council
As the voice of the jewish community, to protect jewish interests & promote jewish ideals.
—
5
Jewish Community Center of Greater
To serve people of all ages in an environment of jewish values and jewish traditions
Philanthropy
6
The Associated Jewish Community
To preserve and enhance jewish life.
Philanthropy
7
Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles
The foundation is the largest manager of charitable assets and leader in planned giving solutions for greater los angeles jewish philanthropists through its various programs.
Philanthropy
8
Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Hartford Inc
The Jewish Community Foundation promotes philanthropy, manages the Greater Hartford Jewish community's charitable endowment and makes grants to support key community needs and innovations.
Philanthropy
9
Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Metrowest Nj
Jewish community foundation (jcf) ensures the future of the jewish federation of greater metrowest nj through effective endowment management, personalized planned giving strategies and grant-making.
Philanthropy
10
Jewish Community Federation of Greater
Fundraising, planning and community relations serving the jewish community of rochester, ny.
Philanthropy
11
Jewish Community Foundation of
Insure the continuity of jewish life in central new york into the future.
Philanthropy
12
Jewish Family Service
Inspired by our history and values, Jewish Family Service supports the needs of Jewish individuals and families, refugees and immigrants, and our broader community to achieve well-being, health, and stability
Human Services
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Yiddish Book Center Inc and the most unlike its peers is Community Foundation for Southeast. 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
8 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Other$769,311Arts & Culture$14,000Philanthropy$11,000Human Services$7,000Animals$1,000Education$1,000
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 COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL YIDDISH BOOK CENTER ↗
- Who funds ORCHARDS CHILDRENS SERVICES ↗
- Who funds YAD EZRA ↗
- Who funds HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds JARC ↗
- Who funds GROSSE POINTE ANIMAL ADOPTION SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds OAKLAND COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA6.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 organisation TOM AND SARAH BORMAN 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.
2024
’20’21’22’23’24
- National Yiddish Book Center Inc — 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: NATIONAL YIDDISH BOOK CENTER.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
low risk
~23 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 2.2× since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 042708878 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on NATIONAL YIDDISH BOOK CENTER, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 23 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2025; revenue grew over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 0% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Tom and Sarah Borman Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Tom and Sarah Borman Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines