Smaller Jewish Communities Overlooked: JFNA Survey Reveals Advocacy Risk

The Visibility Gap: A Structural Risk for Distributed Communities

Jews living in smaller communities are less likely than those in large communities to feel their concerns about antisemitism are taken seriously by law enforcement and would-be allies, a new survey from the jewish Federations of North America has found. This disparity signals a critical weakness in how American Jewish advocacy infrastructure allocates resources and airtime.

The JFNA survey, which was compiled from its March 2025 study of Jewish Life in North America, found that 22% of Jews live in small communities. Yet these communities remain largely absent from major media coverage, federal policy discussions, and philanthropic funding conversations—a gap with real financial and security implications.

The risk exposure is quantifiable. Among respondents, 58% of Jews in small communities reported feeling more likely to be invalidated, compared with 48% of Jews overall. That 10-percentage-point differential reveals a crisis of infrastructure: communities with fewer resources are simultaneously hearing less support from allies and law enforcement.

The Law Enforcement Trust Deficit: A Security Risk Multiplier

Jews in small communities were also less likely to express confidence in local law enforcement's responses to antisemitism. Just 39% reported confidence in law enforcement—a figure that underscores how smaller communities face isolation when incidents occur.

This trust gap cascades into operational risk for Jewish institutions. Small communities lack redundancy. When a synagogue in a town of 3,000 Jews faces an antisemitic threat, there is no parallel institution to absorb displaced members, no competing media outlet to amplify the story, no secondary law enforcement relationship to pursue.

Defined as Jewish communities with fewer than 5,000 Jews living within five miles of their zip code, small Jewish communities are also more likely to be found in the South or in rural or suburban areas. These geographic realities mean that smaller communities depend on state and federal authorities who may have limited experience with antisemitism or Jewish cultural needs.

Funding Fragmentation: The Real Financial Problem

Smaller communities face a double bind: less funding and greater per-capita need. Jewish organizations with more than $5 million in total revenues received 96% of all grant dollars. These larger organizations accounted for 47% of all jewish orgs.

This concentration risk is structural. Major funders like the Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia, Hadassah Foundation, and Jewish National Fund-USA prioritize scale and impact measurement, both favoring larger urban institutions. Smaller communities receive training, consulting, and advocacy services at a discount or not at all.

The Nonprofit Security Grant Program illustrates this exposure. Congress allocated $274.5 million in each of the last two years and raised funding to $300 million for 2026. Yet some Jewish institutions decided not to apply for the funding this year, though there is no estimate of how many. In smaller communities, where institutional capacity is lower and legal uncertainty around political conditions is higher, application abandonment is likely disproportionate.

Why Smaller Communities Struggle to Access Federal Security Resources

But would a synagogue that declares itself a sanctuary for refugees—and refuses to cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement—be eligible for that funding under the Trump administration? What about a congregation that runs afoul of the administration's anti-DEI push by offering programs aimed at making Jews of color, Jews with disabilities or LGBTQ Jews feel more welcome? After more than six months of inquiries by Jewish organizations and members of Congress, the answer remains unclear: The federal government has not provided a definitive explanation of what conditions will apply to the funding. Smaller communities, which lack in-house government affairs staff, are more likely to forgo uncertain resources entirely.

The Organizational Capacity Trap

"Jews in small communities tell us that they feel deeply concerned that they're looking for support, that their leadership is looking for network and resources, because it can feel like they're on their own," Kravetz told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. This is not a perception problem. It is a structural problem of capital allocation.

Smaller communities have volunteer leadership, part-time staff, and minimal organizational infrastructure. When antisemitism strikes, they lack the communications team, legal resources, and external partnerships that larger institutions mobilize instantly. The American Jewish Committee, with 25 regional offices across the United States, concentrates expertise in major metros. Smaller towns receive outreach training, if anything.

Comparison Table: Advocacy & Resource Access by Community Size

Why National Jewish Organizations Cannot Close This Gap Alone

Jews in smaller communities were "lacking a sense of allyship in the communities around them," said Mimi Kravetz, the chief impact and growth officer for JFNA. This is the core diagnosis: allyship is a local function that requires local relationships, local law enforcement partnerships, and local political power.

National organizations—the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, ADL, American Jewish Committee—operate best in major cities with established infrastructure. Their strength is policy analysis, federal advocacy, and national messaging. What they cannot do is embed themselves in a town of 2,000 Jews to cultivate relationships with the police chief, school superintendent, and mayor.

How Smaller Communities Are Excluded from Major Philanthropy Conversations

Funding priority-setting at major Jewish foundations reflects a bias toward measurable scale. The Hadassah Foundation, the Jewish National Fund-USA Boruchin Center, and Jewish Federations allocate grants based on demonstrated capacity, organizational maturity, and ability to report outcomes. These criteria systematically disadvantage newer, smaller, or more informal institutions serving smaller populations. Smaller communities end up competing for scraps from general-purpose funds while larger organizations win dedicated program support worth millions.

The Political Representation Risk

In his interview with JI, Deutch also urged Jewish communal organizations to come together around a common agenda, arguing that the current security environment demands a unified message and a coordinated push. The Jewish Federations of North America will be focused on the six-point security plan laid out by many major Jewish groups following the Capital Jewish Museum shooting earlier this year, which includes massive increases to security grant funding and efforts to address antisemitism online, as well as antisemitism in K-12 and higher education and mental and physical health care spaces; the Holocaust Survivor Assistance Program and social safety net programs such as SNAP and Medicaid. "I think security and combating antisemitism are top of mind across our community, and that's clearly reflected in our aggressive work to increase nonprofit security funds, tackle hate on social media, and advance our six-point security plan," JFNA CEO Eric Fingerhut told JI.

This unified messaging, however, is drafted by leaders from large cities who design solutions for large-city infrastructure. A six-point plan optimized for New York does not translate to rural Mississippi.

What Smaller Communities Need From Law Enforcement (and Aren't Getting)

Although the survey found no statistically significant difference in the antisemitism experienced by Jews in smaller and larger communities, it found that Jews in small communities are more likely to feel that antisemitism is invalidated or dismissed. This suggests that smaller communities experience the same harassment, violence, and threats as larger ones—but without institutional mechanisms to validate or amplify those experiences. A swastika painted on a synagogue in Jackson, Mississippi, receives a police report and maybe a local news mention. The same incident in New York City triggers an ADL press release, FBI investigation, and national media coverage. Smaller communities face the same crime with inferior response infrastructure and zero national resonance.

The Economic Vulnerability of Fragmentation

The Jewish community's economic risk is concentration. Larger organizations accumulate staff, infrastructure, and political capital that smaller ones cannot replicate. When antisemitism spikes in a smaller community—as it has repeatedly in rural and suburban America—the response is slow, uncoordinated, and under-resourced.

For institutional investors tracking Jewish nonprofit sector stability, this fragmentation poses a structural concern. The sector relies on federated giving models that assume funds flow from local communities to central organizations to israel. Smaller communities, already under-resourced and under-heard, are increasingly likely to retain capital locally or redirect it to non-Jewish civic causes where their voices are more visible. This creates a feedback loop: smaller communities feel less heard, so they reduce pledges to federated campaigns, which reduces funding for national organizations, which reduces advocacy capacity for smaller communities.

FAQ: Smaller Communities & Antisemitism Advocacy

Why do smaller Jewish communities report lower confidence in law enforcement?

Smaller police departments often lack specialized training in hate crimes, interfaith relations, and Jewish community needs. Officers in rural areas may have never investigated antisemitism before. They lack the institutional memory and specialized units that major city police departments maintain. Additionally, smaller communities cannot sustain ongoing relationships with law enforcement the way large federations can.

How does funding concentration worsen antisemitism response in smaller communities?

Smaller communities receive disproportionately little grant funding relative to their needs. Organizations lack staff dedicated to security, communications, or government relations. When an incident occurs, the community cannot hire a crisis communications firm, legal advocate, or security consultant as larger institutions do. The incident goes unprocessed and unresolved.

What federal policies disadvantage smaller Jewish communities specifically?

The Nonprofit Security Grant Program and other federal initiatives assume applicants have legal and compliance expertise. Ambiguous political conditions on grants further deter smaller organizations with limited staff to navigate murky requirements. Smaller communities may simply not apply rather than risk scrutiny or lose grants.

Can national Jewish organizations serve smaller communities better?

National organizations can improve by creating dedicated regional coordinators for underdensity areas, funding smaller-institution capacity building through foundations like Hadassah or JNF-USA, and decentralizing advocacy infrastructure so smaller communities own their own narrative and don't depend entirely on distant national offices for legitimacy and support.

What Must Change: A Framework for Structural Reform

The JFNA survey documents a crisis of voice and visibility. But the underlying problem is economic: smaller communities lack the financial and human capital to compete for attention, resources, and political influence.

Reform requires three shifts. First, major philanthropic funders—including institutional investors in Jewish community stability—must earmark specific allocations for smaller-community infrastructure and not expect smaller communities to compete for general-purpose funds against larger, better-resourced applicants. Second, national organizations must decentralize decision-making so smaller communities help define advocacy priorities rather than receive top-down strategic directives. Third, federal funding programs like the Nonprofit Security Grant must clarify conditions and expand eligibility to remove barriers unique to smaller organizations.

Until then, smaller Jewish communities will remain audible only when tragedy strikes—and even then, only to their local neighbors, never to the national conversation.

Related Articles

• Israel Regional Economics 2026: Where Growth and Challenges Diverge
• Jewish Telegraphic Agency: Role as News Anchor in Volatile Markets
• Haredi Population Explosion: The Demographic Inflection Reshaping Jewish Asset Flows