Skip to content
848 Charity Fund at a glance

· Private foundation

848 Charity Fund

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$77k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$38k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Religion$627kEducation$86kInternational$66kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $9k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $68k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$244k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NETINA VECHINUCH BECHEN UVECHESED$38,000
VARIOUS SMALLER$20,101
CONG MESIVTA$10,000
KNESSET YEHUDA$6,030
Individual grant recipient$3,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

US giving: 88% of grant dollars ($755k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 12% that went abroad ($106k) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 99% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%CONG BOROV: $150k → 14%PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $5k → 17%KOLLEL BNEI TORAH: $4k → 20%TELSHE YESHIVAH: $4k → 14%CONGREGATION MESIFTA: $7k → 14%TELSHE YESHIVAH: $4k → 14%TELSHE YESHIVAH: $4k → 14%TELSHE YESHIVAH: $4k → 14%CONG MESIVTA: $46k → 20%TELSHE YESHIVAH: $4k → 14%CONG MESIVTA: $13k → 20%TELSHE YESHIVAH: $4k → 14%CONG MESIVTA: $13k → 20%MOSDOS BETH YOSEF ZVI: $11k → 20%NETINA VECHINUCH BECHEN UVECHESED: $38k → 20%CONG MESIVTA: $10k → 20%NETINA VECHINUCH BECHEN UVECHESED: $36k → 20%MOSDOS BETH YOSEF ZVI: $10k → 20%NETINA VECHINUCH BECHEN UVECHESED: $14k → 20%BNEI YERUSHLAYIM: $5k → 20%NETINA VECHINUCH BECHEN UVECHESED: $14k → 20%NETINA VECHINUCH BECHEN UVECHESED: $10k → 20%YAD YISROEL: $14k → 20%YAD YISROEL: $12k → 20%YAD YISROEL: $12k → 20%YAD YISROEL: $11k → 20%VAAD HARABANIM: $7k → 20%YAD YISROEL: $6k → 20%VAAD HARABANIM: $7k → 20%YAD YISROEL: $6k → 20%CONG AHAVAS TZDOKAH V'CHESED: $30k → 20%AHAVAS TZODOKAH VCHESED: $8k → 20%YESHIVA ZICHRON MEILECH: $7k → 20%YESHIVA ZICHRON MEILECH: $5k → 20%VARIOUS SAMLLER: $28k → 20%VARIOUS SMALLER: $24k → 20%VARIOUS SMALLER: $20k → 20%VARIOUS SMALLER: $16k → 20%VARIOUS SAMLLER: $15k → 20%VARIOUS 1000: $14k → 20%VARIOUS SAMLLER: $14k → 20%KOLLEL ZICHRON YOSEF: $14k → 20%VARIOUS SAMLLER: $13k → 20%KNESSET YEHUDA: $11k → 20%VARIOUS 1000: $8k → 20%KNESSET YEHUDA: $6k → 20%TOMOSHOVER CONG: $6k → 20%TOMOSHOVER CONGRAGATION: $6k → 20%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Beyond the US: 12% of all-years giving ($106k)

1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Israel$106k · 3 grants
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

67%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$571k · 17 repeat orgs$286k to everyone else

17 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
13

Total granted

$571k
$286k

Still filing today

24%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • NV
    NETINA VECHINUCH BECHEN UVECHESED
    5× · 2021–2025 · $112k
  • CM
    CONG MESIVTA
    4× · 2020–2025 · $82k
  • GS
    GLORIOUS SWORD MINISTRIES FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL INC
    4× · 2019–2022 · $69k · revenue +46% · 82% of their budget

Funded once

  • CB
    CONGREGATION BOROV INC
    one grant, 2021 · $150k
  • IO
    INSTITUTIONS OF MAHARITZ DUSHINSKY
    one grant, 2017 · $55k
  • CA
    CONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INC
    one grant, 2017 · $30k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field
04the grantee network

5 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 5 of the 31 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
5/5
Grantees still filing
2/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONGREGATION BOROV INC: $150,000 · OtherCONGREGATION BOROV INCNETINA VECHINUCH BECHEN UVECHESED: $112,000 · OtherNETINA VECHINUCH BECHEN UVECHESEDCONG MESIVTA: $82,100 · OtherCONG MESIVTAVARIOUS SMALLER: $60,314 · OtherVARIOUS SMALLERYAD YISROEL: $60,000 · OtherYAD YISROELINSTITUTIONS OF MAHARITZ DUSHINSKY: $55,000 · OtherINSTITUTIONS OF MAHARITZ DUSHINSKYIndividual grant recipient: $51,300 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INC: $30,000 · Other+18 more: $156,780 · Other+18 moreGLORIOUS SWORD MINISTRIES FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL INC: $68,776 · ReligionGLORIOUS SWOR…MOSDOS BETH YOSEF ZVI: $22,525 · ReligionMOSDOS BETH Y…FRIENDS OF DARCHEI ROCHEL INC: $4,000 · ReligionAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MOSDOS MONTREAL INC: $3,750 · ReligionPEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $5,000 · Philanthropy
Other$757,494Religion$99,051Philanthropy$5,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetGLORIOUS SWORD MINISTRIES FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL INC: $68,776 over 4y, 82% of budgetMOSDOS BETH YOSEF ZVI: $22,525 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetPEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF DARCHEI ROCHEL INC: $4,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MOSDOS MONTREAL INC: $3,750 over 3y, 0.3% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds GLORIOUS SWORD MINISTRIES FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
  • Who funds MOSDOS BETH YOSEF ZVI ↗
  • Who funds PEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF DARCHEI ROCHEL INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MOSDOS MONTREAL INC ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Ojc FundJack Adjmi Family Fou…Regina Goldwasser Fou…The Lexicon Foundatio…Jewish Communal FundNational Philanthropi…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…
The Ojc FundNY19.7× affinity8 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Regina Goldwasser Foundation · The Lexicon Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization 848 Charity Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from 848 Charity Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to 848 Charity Fund?

    Find your warmest path to 848 Charity Fund through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 31 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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 an EIN, 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.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on 848 Charity’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home