Montreal, QC · Charitable organization
Young People's Congregation Of Spiritual & Secular Knowledge (Congregation Zeirai Dath W'Daath Of Montreal)
Maintained premises and made expenditures to provide a place of worship hold religious studies maintained cemetery plots for congregation members
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| VARIOUS | C$21,912 |
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 +78% since the first grant, against +23% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 9 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
- CHCHABAD HOPES5× · 2017–2021 · C$7k · revenue +263%
- RCRABBIBICAL COLLEGE OF CANADA4× · 2017–2021 · C$6k · revenue +58%
- CCCHABAD CHAI CENTER5× · 2017–2021 · C$4k · revenue +86%
Funded once
- MVMENUCHA VESIMCHAgraduatedone grant, 2021 · C$2k · revenue +97%
- YBYESHIVA BEIT YOSSEF MEIRone grant, 2020 · C$1k · revenue +3%
- KMKOLLEL MENACHEMone grant, 2020 · C$260 · revenue -32%
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 carry on a school for religious studies and to pursue the advancement of religion and rituals of jewish interest.
Provide scholarships to students operates torah study learning
To provide scholarships and assistance to deserving students to continue their religious courses at belz yeshiva
École dont la vocation est la promotion de l'éducation religieuse
The charity opertes a school for jewish children
Promotion of jewish culture and religion engage jewish students learning of culture
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 religious education for underpriveleged children in israel
The charity advances education and religion by operating a school for post graduate talmudic students as well as providing scholarships and bursaries.
To establish jewish courses for men of all ages. to print religious literature. to establish a library of jewish religious books. enhancement of the jewish religion.
To operate a school for higher talmudic studies
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is L'Organisation de la jeunesse Chabad Loubavitch/Chabad Loubavitch Youth Organization and the most unlike its peers is Congregation of the Followers of the Rabbi of Lubavitch. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
17 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. 17 of the 19 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 CHABAD HOPES ↗
- Who funds RABBIBICAL COLLEGE OF CANADA ↗
- Who funds CHABAD CHAI CENTER ↗
- Who funds CHABAD MONTREAL WEST ↗
- Who funds ARIZAL ↗
- Who funds MENUCHA VESIMCHA ↗
- Who funds TOMCHEI SHABBOS ↗
- Who funds ACADEMIE BETH RIVKAH ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA BEIT YOSSEF MEIR ↗
- Who funds MADA ↗
- Who funds ECOLE MESIFTA KEREM MENACHEM ↗
- Who funds KOLLEL MENACHEM ↗
- Who funds CONGREGATION LUBAVITCH ↗
- Who funds CHABAD LUBAVITCH YOUTH ORGANIZATION ↗
- Who funds CANADIAN FRIENDS OF BROWARD ↗
- Who funds VAAD MISHMERES MITZVOS ↗
- Who funds CHABAD OF DOLLARD ↗
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: Hatzolas Yisroel D'Arizal · Jewish Community Foundation of Montreal / La Fondation Communautaire Juive de Montréal · L'Organisation de la jeunesse Chabad Loubavitch/Chabad Loubavitch Youth Organization · Congregation de L'Aide Fraternelle Ezras Achim · Rayjo Charitable Trust · École Mesivta Kerem Menachem Mesivta Kerem Menachem School · Chabad Chai Center / Centre Chabad Chai · Centre Chabad De Ville Mont Royal Chabad Centre of The Town of Mount Royal · Congregation Bais Menachem Chabad-Lubavitch · The George Kohn Charitable Foundation / la Fondation Charitable George Kohn · Aaron and Susan Lieberman Foundation · Federation Cja
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.