· Private foundation
Weinstein Foundation Inc
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.
Read this first · the figures below need context
96% of Weinstein Foundation Inc’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Greater Miami Jewish Federation Inc, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 1 organization directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2021, the last year Weinstein Foundation Inc named its own grantees at scale: 5 organizations, $1k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| EASTBROOK ACADEMY | $180 |
| LEUKEMIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION | $180 |
| AMERICAN FREINDS OF ALYN HOSPITAL | $100 |
| SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER | $100 |
| AMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEKET ISRAEL | $100 |
| WISCONSIN INSTITUE OF TORAH STUDY | $18 |
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 (FY18–20, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 69% 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.
22 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2021, 20 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call). Read against FY2021, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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, 48% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $700 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
- ACAMIT CHILDREN INC3× · 2019–2023 · $5k · revenue +143%
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MEIR PANIM2× · 2018–2019 · $450 · revenue +329%
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF ALYN HOSPITALINC3× · 2019–2023 · $380 · revenue +27%
Funded once
- CFCentral Fund of Israelgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +145%
- CFCENTER FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF JEWISH EDUCATIONone grant, 2019 · $1k · revenue +4%
- NTNORTHLIGHT THEATRE INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $1k · revenue +160%
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.
To further jewish education in israel
To promote, benefit, and support Jewish religious, charitable & educational activities in Israel and the USA.
To foster jewish religious education and disseminate the teachings of rabbi nachman of breslov through publication and distribution of books and cds, as well as seminars, lectures and study groups.
To support religious, charitable, scientific, literary and/or educational programs
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Friends of Leket Israel Inc and the most unlike its peers is American Friends Tomchai Shabat Foundation. 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 31 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% 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.
38 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. 38 of the 77 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 GREATER MIAMI JEWISH FEDERATION INC ↗
- Who funds MILWAUKEE JEWISH FEDERATION INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF AACI INC ↗
- Who funds THE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds Central Fund of Israel ↗
- Who funds AMIT CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds HOLOCAUST DOCUMENTATION AND EDUCATION CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds BIKUR CHOLIM OF MIAMI BEACH INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF JEWISH EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YAD ELIEZER ↗
- Who funds NORTHLIGHT THEATRE INC ↗
- Who funds JEWISH COMMUNITY SERVICES OF SOUTH FLORIDA INC ↗
- Who funds Chabad of Iceland Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS TOMCHAI SHABAT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Helping Hands Food Ko Op Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MEIR PANIM ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF ALYN HOSPITALINC ↗
- Who funds Yehudi Inc ↗
- Who funds SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER 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: Jewish Communal Fund · Fjc · The Russell & Ronalee Galbut Family Foundation Inc · The Ojc Fund · Greater Miami Jewish Federation Inc · Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore · Casai Family Foundation · Hahn Family Foundation Inc · Alice G Hanson Family Foundation · Jay and Jean Schottenstein Foundation · The Dennis Berman Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago
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 Weinstein Foundation Inc 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.
- Jewish Community Services of South Florida Inc — 1% of income from government
- Yehudi Inc — 0% of income from government
- Helping Hands Food Ko Op 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 Weinstein Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Weinstein Foundation Inc 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.