Toronto, ON · Charitable organization
Institute for Advanced Talmudic and Halachic Studies
Established and operated as an institution of jewish training and education particularly in the fields of rabbinic talmudic halachic studies.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ACHIM TORONTO | C$8,026 |
| INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED JUDAIC STUDIES | C$1,845 |
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 +52% since the first grant, against +34% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; C$0 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
- IAINSTITUTE ADVANCED JUDAIC STUDIES2× · 2023–2024 · C$33k · revenue -16%
- ATACHIM TORONTO3× · 2022–2024 · C$19k · revenue +52%
- JHJEWISH HERITAGE FOUNDATION3× · 2021–2023 · C$5k · revenue +75%
Funded once
- TCTORONTO CEDERgraduatedone grant, 2021 · C$6k · revenue +34%
- YNYESHIVAS NACHLAS TZVIone grant, 2022 · C$2k · revenue -2%
- NNEXGENone grant, 2023 · C$2k · revenue -5%
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.
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.
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 provides scholarships and assistance to needy students to enable them to study at yeshiva toras chalm
To promote precepts of orthodox judaism and training of rabbinic leaders
Provide scholarships and assistance to deserving students to continue their religious courses given at mosdos gur in jerusalem israel.
The charity maintained an elementary school for the teaching of the moral and religious principles of the jewish orthodox faith
Established and operated as an institution of jewish training and education particularly in the fields of rabbinic talmudic halachic studies.
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 charity provides religious education for underpriveleged children in israel
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.
Support of jewish education and institutions
Issued scholarships for religious education
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Tiferes Bais Yaakov and the most unlike its peers is The Nexgen Charitable Foundation. 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.