Skip to content
Abraham Wassner & Sons Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Abraham Wassner & Sons Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$117k
Granted FY2023
9
Grants FY2023
3
States reached
$8k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02Its granteesRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0175% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Religion$325kInternational$7kPhilanthropy$3kHuman Services$3kHealth$2kEducation$1kOther$0
02FY2023 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $22,370, the rows itemized in this filing. The $117,370 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $95,000 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$1,800
Median grant
3
States reached
$918k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BIKUR CHOUM OF MANHATTAN$7,500
MIFAL MAYUNES INC$5,000
MESIVTA TIFERETH ISRAEL OF RIZHIN$1,800
MESIVTA TIFERETH ISRAEL OF RIZHIN$1,800
MONROE BENVOLENT SOCIETY$1,800
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF IDF RABBIN$1,770
AGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA$1,200
MESIVTA TIFERETH ISRAEL OF RIZHIN$1,000
SHALOM TORAH CENTER$500
02Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

49%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$220k · 5 repeat orgs$232k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +156% since the first grant, against +115% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2023, 4 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
34

Total granted

$220k
$216k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+156%
+115%

Still filing today

20%
3%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 22% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $17k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’21’22’23
ReligionInternationalHealthOther
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

  • CA
    CONG AHAVAS TZEDOKA V'CHESED
    4× · 2018–2022 · $98k
  • A
    ATC
    3× · 2019–2022 · $57k
  • MT
    MESIVTA TIFERETH ISRAEL OF RIZHIN
    5× · 2018–2023 · $57k

Funded once

  • KR
    KUPATH RAMBAN KOLEL POLIN
    one grant, 2022 · $50k
  • MT
    Mesivta Tifereth Israel of Ruzhin
    one grant, 2017 · $37k
  • JI
    Jew in the City A NJ Nonprofit Corporationgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue +115%
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.

03Its field
03the grantee network

5 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2024.

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 2024, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 5 of the 45 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
4/5
Grantees still filing
2/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONG AHAVAS TZEDOKA V'CHESED: $98,300 · OtherCONG AHAVAS TZEDOKA V'CHESEDATC: $57,000 · OtherATCMESIVTA TIFERETH ISRAEL OF RIZHIN: $56,900 · OtherMESIVTA TIFERETH ISRAEL OF RIZHINKUPATH RAMBAN KOLEL POLIN: $50,000 · OtherKUPATH RAMBAN KOLEL POLINMesivta Tifereth Israel of Ruzhin: $37,000 · OtherMesivta Tifereth Israel of RuzhinE.M.O: $15,000 · OtherYeshivah Aharon Yaakov Ohr Eliyahu: $15,000 · Other+34 more: $90,090 · Other+34 moreJew in the City A NJ Nonprofit Corporation: $25,000 · ReligionMIFAL MAYUNES INC: $5,000 · ReligionPROJECT REFUAH INC: $2,500 · InternationalBIKUR CHOLIM OF MANHATTAN INC: $2,000 · Health
Other$419,290Religion$30,000International$2,500Health$2,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetJew in the City A NJ Nonprofit Corporation: $25,000 over 1y, 9.2% of budgetMIFAL MAYUNES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetPROJECT REFUAH INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetBIKUR CHOLIM OF MANHATTAN INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetAGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA: $1,200 over 1y, 0.0% 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 Jew in the City A NJ Nonprofit Corporation ↗
  • Who funds MIFAL MAYUNES INC ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT REFUAH INC ↗
  • Who funds BIKUR CHOLIM OF MANHATTAN INC ↗
  • Who funds AGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA ↗

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 FundFidelity Investments …
The Ojc FundNY12.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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.

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 45 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $345k of grant expense with no grantee named in the published copy. A private foundation itemizes every grant it makes, so a return carrying none has filed its list as an attachment that the public copy does not include. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Abraham Wassner & Sons’ 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