Montreal, QC · Charitable organization
Canadian Friends of Yeshivat Wiznitz of Bnei Braq
Provide scholarships and assistance to deserving students to continue their religious courses given at yeshivat wiznitz.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under C$10k3 grants · C$7k
- C$10k–50k1 grant · C$21k
- C$50k–250k1 grant · C$228k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WIZNITZ COMMUNITY CENTRE | C$228,055 |
| MCB | C$20,688 |
| CHASDAI TOVIM MEOROS | C$5,140 |
| CONGREGATION BELZ | C$2,000 |
| TASHBAR MONTREAL | C$250 |
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.
5 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 2 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, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; C$5k 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
- CICONGREGATION IMRAY CHAIM7× · 2017–2023 · C$921k · revenue -45%
- WCWIZNITZ COMMUNITY CENTRE3× · 2022–2024 · C$257k · revenue -81%
- MM.C.B.2× · 2017–2024 · C$48k · revenue -15%
Funded once
- BCBNEI CHESED FOUNDATIONone grant, 2019 · C$20k
- GZGEMACH ZICHRON BARUCH ZVIgraduatedone grant, 2021 · C$10k · revenue +188%
- YHYAM HATALMUD FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · C$6k · revenue -23%
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 provide scholarships and assistance to deserving students to continue their religious courses at belz yeshiva
To provide interest free loans to needy people.
To provide financial assistance to needy people in difficult situations. to provide scholarships to qualified students
To provice interest free loand to the needy. to provide grants to qualified donees to enable them to carry on their work
This organization provides interest-free loans to persons of low income.
To advance education by providing scholarships and financial assistance to students at mosdos belz school in israel. to relieve poverty by providing financial assistance and interest-free loans to the poor. and to undertake activities…
Administered the charitable activities of the zolty family and others for the advancement of education and jewish religion and loans to the needy.
The organization donates and lends money to individuals in need
Providing scholarships to poor and low income students in israel.
Interest free loans to needy students and other individuals
Issued scholarships for religious education
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mifalei Chaim Bechesed (Mcb) and the most unlike its peers is Institution Tashbar. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
9 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. 9 of the 11 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.
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.
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: Mifalei Chaim Bechesed (McB) · Hatzolas Yisroel D'Arizal · Fondation de la Famille Fischman Fischman Family Foundation · The M.K. Foundation/La Fondation M.K. · Maharam Tav Fund · Jewish Community Foundation of Montreal / La Fondation Communautaire Juive de Montréal · L'École Beth Tziporah · The George Kohn Charitable Foundation / la Fondation Charitable George Kohn · D E Foundation / la Fondation D E · Aaron and Susan Lieberman Foundation · Charité Tzedakah Montréal Charity Tzedakah Montreal · Chasdei Shlomo
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.