Skip to content
Canadian charitiesMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →

North York, ON · Charitable organization

Toronto Cheder

Religious school for training religious students

C$125k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
Regions reached
C$51k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02Your edgeRead
03Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under C$10k4 grants · C$22k
  • C$10k–50k2 grants · C$53k
  • C$50k–250k1 grant · C$51k
C$8,830
Median grant
1
Regions reached
C$16M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
YESHIVA GEDOLA BRIDGEPORTC$50,800
JEWISH HERITAGE FOUNDATIONC$27,680
THE THORNHILL JEWISH FUNDC$25,127
BAIS YAAKOV OF THORNHILLC$8,830
BAIS YAAKOV ELEMENTARY SCHOOLC$5,000
OHR CHAYA CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONC$4,300
YESHIVA NACHALS ZVIC$3,500
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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
C$329k · 7 repeat orgsC$61k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +49% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
4

Total granted

C$329k
C$4k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+49%
+25%

Still filing today

100%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 54% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; C$57k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
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

  • YG
    YESHIVA GEDOLA BRIDGEPORT
    6× · 2019–2024 · C$267k · revenue +76%
  • BY
    BAIS YAAKOV OF THORNHILL
    3× · 2022–2024 · C$15k · revenue +35%
  • M
    MESIVTA
    3× · 2017–2019 · C$10k · revenue +62%

Funded once

  • BO
    Beth Oloth Charitable Organization
    one grant, 2017 · C$2k
  • KT
    KOLIEL TORONTO
    one grant, 2023 · C$1k · revenue -16%
  • B
    BAYTgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · C$680 · revenue +26%

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
Yeshivas Oholei Menachem Mendel Lubavitch

To establish an orthodox jewish high school for boys devoted to the study of the laws tenets and doctrines of the jewish faith.

—
2
Tiferes Bais Yaakov

The charity operates a religious high school of instruction for jewish girls

—
3
Yeshiva Ateres Yisroel

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.

—
4
Yeshivat Yesodei Hatora

The charity maintained an elementary school for the teaching of the moral and religious principles of the jewish orthodox faith

—
5
Beth Jacob High School for Girls

To provide an excellent school system for jewish girls to follow the jewish orthodox tradition.

—
6
Yeshiva Torah Temimah

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.

—
7
The Institute of Torah Education

The institute of torah education advances religion by teaching students doctrines observances and culture associated with the orthodox jewish faith.

—
8
Beth Hamedrash L'horaah

Operate a school for teaching religious studies

—
9
ÉCole Mesifta Yoel Moshe

To carry on a school for religious studies and to pursue the advancement of religion and rituals of jewish interest.

—
10
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.

—
11
Yeshiva Student Religious Education Fund

The organization has been set up to provide religious education.

—
12
Kollel Toldos Yakov Yosef
—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Beth Oloth Charitable Organization and the most unlike its peers is Thornhill Jewish Fund. 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/14
Grantees still filing
7/14
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$10MC$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetYESHIVA GEDOLA BRIDGEPORT — C$267,200 over 6y, 5.6% of budgetJEWISH HERITAGE FOUNDATION — C$27,680 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE THORNHILL JEWISH FUND — C$25,127 over 1y, 11% of budgetBAIS YAAKOV OF THORNHILL — C$14,608 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetYESHIVA NACHALS ZVI — C$11,600 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetJOE DWEK HAEMET SEPHARDIC SCHOOL — C$11,381 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetMESIVTA — C$9,676 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetBNOS BAIS YAAKOV — C$8,900 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetBAIS YAAKOV ELEMENTARY SCHOOL — C$5,543 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetOHR CHAYA CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION — C$4,300 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBeth Oloth Charitable Organization — C$1,725 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKOLIEL TORONTO — C$1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBAYT — C$680 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEITZ CHAIM SCHOOLS — C$560 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 Thomas Hofstedter…Moral Arc FoundationThe Gra Charitable Tr…The Ff Charitable Tru…The B&C Zy Gezunt Cha…Jack and Doris Bistri…The George Hofstedter…Zichron Binyomin Char…My Charity FundThe Institute of Tora…Rachel Bitton Charita…The Burning Bush Foun…
The Thomas Hofstedter Family FoundationON10.3× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Thomas Hofstedter Family Foundation · Moral Arc Foundation · The Gra Charitable Trust · The Ff Charitable Trust · The B&C Zy Gezunt Charitable Foundation · Jack and Doris Bistricer Charitable Foundation · The George Hofstedter Family Foundation · Zichron Binyomin Charity Foundation · My Charity Fund · The Institute of Torah Education · Rachel Bitton Charitable Foundation · The Burning Bush 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.

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 charitable organization under teaching institutions.

Source object 893910380:2024-12-31 · View the T3010 on the CRA register

Play a game based on Toronto Cheder’s filings →