Thornhill, ON · Charitable organization
Ahavat Shalom Sephardic Congregation
To establish maintain and support a house of worship with services conducted in accordance with the tenets and doctrines of the jewish faith and to preach and advance the teachings of the jewish faith and the religious tenets doctrines observances and culture associated with that faith
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| JEWISH HERITAGE FOUNDATION OF CANADA | C$217 |
| KAV SHALOM | C$106 |
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +47% since the first grant, against +21% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; C$106 went to new ones.
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.”
Backed again, and grew
- YNYESHIVA NACHALAS ZVI3× · 2017–2020 · C$8k · revenue +62%
- BYBAIS YAAKOV ELEMENTARY SCHOOL2× · 2018–2019 · C$3k · revenue +47%
- NINER ISRAEL YESHIVA2× · 2021–2023 · C$1k · revenue +9%
Funded once
- MCMEGINEI CHANNAHone grant, 2020 · C$780 · revenue +4%
- BJBETH JACOB HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLSone grant, 2017 · C$120 · revenue +21%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent CRA 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 matches that aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
To establish an orthodox jewish high school for boys devoted to the study of the laws tenets and doctrines of the jewish faith.
The charity operates a religious high school of instruction for jewish girls
Operated an orthodox jewish high school geared to students who need and would benefit from individual attention not available in existing orthodox jewish high schools.
The school educates high-school age male students in both secular and jewish studies in a non-conventional way offering more attention than normal to each student.
Maintained a religious school for the training and instruction of religious scholars maintained a house of worship in compliance with the requirements and practices of the jewish faith in the orthodox tradition.
The charity maintained an elementary school for the teaching of the moral and religious principles of the jewish orthodox faith
To support with and participate with the scholarships provided by yeshivat kehilat yackov in brooklyn new york
To provide scholarships and assistance to deserving students to continue their religious courses at belz yeshiva
To advance and teach the religious tenets doctrines observances and culture associated with the jewish orthodox faith
Providing scholarships to poor and low income students in israel.
The organization operates a religious jewish high school for deaf and hearing impaired students who desire a religious jewish education and who are unable to attend or would have great difficulty attending a conventional religious jewish…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ner Israel-Joseph (J.T.) Tanenbaum Yeshivah College of Toronto and the most unlike its peers is Meginei Chana Association of Toronto. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2024.
Each one resolved to its own CRA 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 2017–2024, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover.
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.