North York, ON · Private foundation
Mitzvah Charity Fund
Provided funds to qualified donees to help them carry out their work
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under C$10k52 grants · C$62k
- C$10k–50k8 grants · C$147k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SINAI CHILD | C$35,957 |
| RFRO | C$23,000 |
| RELIEF CANADA | C$20,000 |
| CHEVRA OSEH CHESED | C$19,800 |
| AGUDATH ISRAEL | C$13,124 |
| MY CHARITY | C$12,400 |
| MASSER | C$12,000 |
| JEWISH HERITAGE FOUNDATION | C$10,990 |
| BOBOV | C$6,580 |
| MESIFTA OF LUBAVITCH | C$6,100 |
| TORONTO CHEDER | C$5,100 |
| EITZ CHAIM | C$5,000 |
| PATH OF TORAH SCHOOL | C$4,000 |
| TIFERTH BAIS YAAKOV | C$3,600 |
| BAIS CHAYA MUSHKA | C$3,500 |
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.
91 repeat relationships — 43 still active in FY2024, 48 since wound down; 14 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, 97% 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
- TSTOMCHEI SHABBOS8× · 2017–2024 · C$301k · revenue +4%
- COCHEVRA OSEH CHESED5× · 2020–2024 · C$124k · revenue +10%
- HHADRACHA5× · 2017–2021 · C$73k · revenue +27%
Funded once
- CFCANADIAN FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH OF ISRAELgraduatedone grant, 2021 · C$7k · revenue +200%
- CHCANADA HELPSone grant, 2019 · C$6k
- CCFFCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · C$3k · revenue +110%
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.
Support of jewish education and institutions
The organization has been set up to provide religious education.
To provide scholarships and assistance to deserving students to continue their religious courses at belz yeshiva
The institute of torah education advances religion by teaching students doctrines observances and culture associated with the orthodox jewish faith.
The charity provides scholarships and promotes the study of judaism carrying out educational programming both in and out of schools, intensive study workshops and teacher training in biblical studies.
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 scholarship to needy students
Provide scholarships to needy students persuing studies of higher education in israel.
Funds provided for students desirous of studying advanced Talmudic and Torah law at Mercaz Hatorah Rabbinical Seminary in Jerusalem and other similar institutions.
The charity provides religious education for underpriveleged children in israel
To provide scholarship and assistance to needy students to enable them to follow religious courses at yeshiva toldos aharon for the furtherance of religious study
Established and operated as an institution of jewish training and education particularly in the fields of rabbinic talmudic halachic studies.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mesivta Ohr Temimim Lubavitch and the most unlike its peers is Cybersem Academy. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
130 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. 130 of the 154 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.
- Who funds TOMCHEI SHABBOS ↗
- Who funds AGUDATH ISRAEL ↗
- Who funds MAASER CHARITABLE TRUST ↗
- Who funds CHEVRA OSEH CHESED ↗
- Who funds HADRACHA ↗
- Who funds MY CHARITY ↗
- Who funds YESODEI HATORAH ↗
- Who funds RELIEF CANADA ↗
- Who funds JEWISH HERITAGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SINAI CHILD ↗
- Who funds PATH OF TORAH SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds YESODEI HATORAH ↗
- Who funds EITZ CHAIM ↗
- Who funds TORONTO CHEDER ↗
- Who funds CANADA HELPS ↗
- Who funds MESIFTA OF LUBAVITCH ↗
- Who funds AGUDATH ISRAEL ↗
- Who funds BIKUR CHOLIM ↗
- Who funds BOBOV ↗
- Who funds BNEI AKIVA SCHOOLS ↗
- Who funds BNEI ZION ↗
- Who funds BNOS BAIS YAAKOOV HIGH SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds BETH OLOTH ↗
- Who funds TOFERTJ BAIS YAAKOV ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA NEFESH DOVID ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA NACLAS TZVI ↗
- Who funds BETH JACOB HIGH SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds CONGREGATION CHASIDEI BOBOV ↗
- Who funds BAIS CHAYA MUSHKA ↗
- Who funds NEEMAN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA MISHKAN HATORAH ↗
- Who funds BNEI AKIVA SCHOOLS ↗
- Who funds KUPAS HACHESEDMEORATH ↗
- Who funds OORAH ↗
- Who funds JLIC CANADA ↗
- Who funds CANADIAN FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH OF ISRAEL ↗
- Who funds SHMUEL ZAHAVY CHEDER CHABAD ↗
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: The Chaim Moshe Friedman Memorial Fund · Heitner Charitable Foundation · The George Hofstedter Family Foundation · The S. Sigler Family Charitable Foundation · Zichron Binyomin Charity Foundation · Mae Day Foundation · The Weitz Family Foundation · The Friedberg Charitable Foundation · The F&R Hauer Charitable Foundation · Jack and Doris Bistricer Charitable Foundation · Zolty Charitable Foundation · Fieldgate Cares Foundation
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.