Skip to content
Canadian charities

North York, ON · Private foundation

The E & M Charitable Foundation

The charitable purposes of the foundation are to relieve poverty the advancement of education the advancement of religion the advancement of other charitable purposes which benefit the community as a whole

C$40k
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
Regions reached
C$10k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02Your edgeRead
03Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under C$10k4 grants · C$20k
  • C$10k–50k2 grants · C$20k
C$5,000
Median grant
2
Regions reached
C$2.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE SHTIEBELC$10,000
LEKET CANADAC$10,000
CANADA CHARITY PARTNERSC$5,000
MIZRACHI ORGANIZATIONC$5,000
BROTHERS OF MERCY FOUNDATIONC$5,000
COMMUNITY FUNDS FOR FAMILIES AND CHILDRENC$5,000
02Your edge
repeat funding

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.

57%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
C$100k · 3 repeat orgsC$77k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +168% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.

3 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
7

Total granted

C$100k
C$52k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+168%
0%

Still filing today

100%
86%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 38% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; C$25k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

  • HT
    HATZOLOH TORONTO
    4× · 2019–2023 · C$45k · revenue +168%
  • CF
    CANADIAN FRIENDS OF OF LEKET
    3× · 2019–2024 · C$30k · revenue +462%
  • CF
    COMMUNITY FUNDS FOR FAMILIES AND CHILDREN
    3× · 2019–2024 · C$25k · revenue +55%

Funded once

  • NF
    NE'EMAN FOUNDATION CANADA
    one grant, 2017 · C$13k · revenue -20%
  • SW
    SMALL WONDERS
    one grant, 2019 · C$10k · revenue -10%
  • HK
    HACHONAS KALLAHgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · C$10k · revenue +105%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent CRA filings.

03Your field

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.

1
Chasdei Levy Yitzcok

To relieve poverty by providing reasonable financial means for food shelter and other supplies or services to needy persons in israel

—
2
Beis Hatavshil and Hachnosas Orchim of Toronto Charitable Fund

To relieve poverty by providing food and other basic supplies to persons of low income.

—
3
Maasim Tovim Foundation

To provide funds to registered charities

—
4
The Haichel Hatorah B'zion Foundation

The charity collected funds from the public for the purpose of providing scholarships for deserving students attending haichel hatorah b'zion institutions.

—
5
Keren Hashluchim

To relieve poverty by providing financial assistance to families in eastern europe.

—
6
The Dov Zimmerman Z'l Foundation

To make donations to charitable organizations

—
7
Zolty Charitable Foundation

Administered the charitable activities of the zolty family and others for the advancement of education and jewish religion and loans to the needy.

—
8
Mifal Klita

Promoted the advancement of jewish heritage culture and jewish education particularily among the underpriveledged and needy children. establish and maintain and to aid in the establishment and maintennace of schools and classes providing…

—
9
Tzidkas Yisorel

The organization intends to operate as a charitable foundation whose purpose is primarily to make donations to qualified donees.

—
10
Canadian Friends of Holocaust Survivors Relief Fund of Shearis Hapletah

To provide assistance to those in need

—
11
Mazon Canada

The charity raises money primarily from the jeiwsh community and distributes grants to front line organizations that fight hunger

—
12
Ezrat Israel Charitable Foundation

Provide food and shelter clothing education to poor and needy people.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ne'eman Foundation Canada and the most unlike its peers is Hatzoloh Toronto. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

02the grantee network

14 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/14
Grantees still filing
5/14
Grew since you first funded

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%C$1.0MC$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetHATZOLOH TORONTO — C$45,000 over 4y, 2.1% of budgetCANADIAN FRIENDS OF OF LEKET — C$30,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetCOMMUNITY FUNDS FOR FAMILIES AND CHILDREN — C$25,000 over 3y, 8.7% of budgetNE'EMAN FOUNDATION CANADA — C$13,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSMALL WONDERS — C$10,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetTHE SHTIEBEL — C$10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetHACHONAS KALLAH — C$10,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetBROTHERS OF MERCY FOUNDATION — C$5,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetZAREINU EDUCATIONAL CENTRE OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO — C$5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJewish National Fund — C$5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTORAS EMETH — C$5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMIZRACHI ORGANIZATION — C$5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCANADA CHARITY PARTNERS — C$5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCanadian Food For Children — C$3,600 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

The Gitta Nishuma Fou…479 FoundationThe Dan-Hytman Family…Nathan & Shani Bleema…The Friedberg Charita…Moral Arc FoundationRayjo Charitable TrustMy Charity Fund
The Gitta Nishuma FoundationON8.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Gitta Nishuma Foundation · 479 Foundation · The Dan-Hytman Family Foundation · Nathan & Shani Bleeman Charitable Foundation · The Friedberg Charitable Foundation · Moral Arc Foundation · Rayjo Charitable Trust · My Charity Fund

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from the Canada Revenue Agency’s published T3010 data — your own annual information return and the multi-year returns of the 14 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year) — each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program description on its T3010; we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without a BN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears. How we build these →

Generated from your T3010 annual information return for the fiscal period ending 2024-12-31, as published by the Canada Revenue Agency in 2024. Amounts are Canadian dollars, as filed and never converted. Registered as a private foundation under foundations.

Source object 818499584:2024-12-31 · View the T3010 on the CRA register

Play a game based on E & M’s filings →