Skip to content
Agudath Israel of Illinois at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Agudath Israel of Illinois

AGUDATH ISRAEL OF ILLINOIS seeks to inspire, educate, protect and provide financial relief for children and families of the orthodox jewish community within the chicagoland area

$945k
Granted FY2023
9
Grants FY2023
3
States reached
$427k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

55% of Agudath Israel of Illinois’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Agudath Israel Of America, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 3 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2023, the last year Agudath Israel of Illinois named its own grantees at scale: 8 organizations, $943k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

0
’18
0
’19
5
’20
17
’21
2
’22
8
’23
3
’24

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

Religion$2.8MPhilanthropy$876kEducation$651kInternational$360kHuman Services$334kRecreation & Sports$107kFood & Nutrition$98k
02FY2023 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $115k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $393k
  • $250k+1 grant · $427k
$38,250
Median grant
3
States reached
$19M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TORAH PREP SCHOOL$427,125
H F EPSTEIN HEBREW ACADEMY$142,916
AGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA$130,000
HENRY & LOUIS MERMELSTEIN CHARITAB$120,000
ESTHER MILLER BAIS YAAKOV$38,250
AREIVIM USA$30,786
MISSOURI TORAH INSTITUTE$25,500
AGUDAH CAMPS$20,204
AGUDAH BAIS HORAAH$7,970
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.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY20–21, $323k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%CHICAGO CHESED FUND: $268k → 14%CHICAGO CHESED FUND: $55k → 14%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.
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

59%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.4M · 8 repeat orgs$1.7M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +21% since the first grant, against -19% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2023, 7 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call). Read against FY2023, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
11

Total granted

$2.4M
$853k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+21%
-19%

Still filing today

50%
55%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $39k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
ReligionEducationInternationalHealthPhilanthropyHuman ServicesOther
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

  • CC
    CHICAGO CHESED FUND
    2× · 2020–2021 · $323k · revenue +21%
  • CN
    CAMP NAGEELA MIDWEST INC
    3× · 2020–2022 · $107k · revenue +33%
  • CM
    CHICAGO MEZUZAH AND MITZVAH CAMPAIGN
    2× · 2020–2021 · $98k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • CA
    CONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INC
    one grant, 2021 · $175k
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE KIEV JEWISH COMMUNITYgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $160k · revenue +50%
  • UM
    UNITED MOSDOS TORAH VEYIRAH YERUSHOLYIM INC
    one grant, 2021 · $115k
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

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
2
University of Judaism Foundation
—
3
American Friends of Amshinover Yeshiva Jerusalem Inc

Support of religious schools in Israel

International
4
Yeshiva Keren Hatorah of Passaic- Clifton

To operate a high school offering religious instruction and general studies as well as a post high school program of talmudic studies. the school shall be run under the standards of orthodox jewish law and tradition.

Education
5
Yeshiva Chayei Olam

Yeshiva chayei olam inc., was established for the purpose of having an orthodox jewish high school. the school teaches talumdic studies, talmudic jurasprudence, orthodox jewish ethics and the old testament. in addition, the school provides…

Education
6
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
7
Yeshiva Toras Chaim of Greater Miami Inc

To operate a religious school for high school and post high school students.

Education
8
Yeshiva Ohr Torah

Promoting education by providing financial assistance and support services to educational organizations worldwide; to promote the jewish religion and jewish education through provision of educational programs, assisting the creation of…

Philanthropy
9
American Friends of Oseh Chayil

To further jewish education in israel

Religion
10
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
11
American Friends of Yeshiva Gedolah Matisyahu Inc

To award scholarships and grants to students from the United States attending Yeshivas Gedolah Matisyahu in the State of Israel

Education
12
Sherit Isroel
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Agudath Israel of America; the most unlike its peers is Henry & Louise Mermelstein Charitable Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

19 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. 19 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/19
Grantees still filing
11/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA: $901,100 · OtherAGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICAVARIOUS CHARITIES: $788,601 · OtherVARIOUS CHARITIESTELSHE YESHIVA-CHICAGO RABBINICAL COLLEGE TELSHE-CHICAGO: $626,988 · OtherTELSHE YESHIVA-CHICAGO RABBINICAL COLLEGE TELSHE-CHICAGOTORAH CENTER-MIDWEST INC: $427,125 · OtherTORAH CENTER-MIDWEST INCCONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INC: $175,000 · OtherH F EPSTEIN HEBREW ACADEMY: $142,916 · Other+10 more: $693,208 · Other+10 moreAGUDATH ISRAEL OF ILLINOIS: $239,072 · ReligionCHICAGO MEZUZAH AND MITZVAH CAMPAIGN: $97,670 · ReligionVAAD HARABBANIM L'INYANEI TZEDUKA INC: $33,000 · ReligionAGUDAH CAMPS INC: $20,204 · ReligionCHICAGO CHESED FUND: $322,670 · Human ServicesPEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $200,000 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MOSDOS NACHLAS SHIMON INC: $75,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDERATION OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $12,500 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE KIEV JEWISH COMMUNITY: $160,000 · InternationalCAMP NAGEELA MIDWEST INC: $107,170 · Recreation & SportsESTHER MILLER BAIS YAAKOV HIGH SCHOOL OF ST LOUIS: $38,250 · EducationMISSOURI TORAH INSTITUTE: $25,500 · EducationMESIVTA OF CLIFTON INC: $12,000 · EducationYESHIVA DERECH HATORAH INC: $5,400 · EducationBEER YITZHAK FOUNDATION INC co Ben Malakh: $77,000 · Health
Other$3,754,938Religion$389,946Human Services$322,670Philanthropy$287,500International$160,000Recreation & Sports$107,170Education$81,150Health$77,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA: $901,100 over 4y, 2.8% of budgetTORAH CENTER-MIDWEST INC: $427,125 over 1y, 9.6% of budgetCHICAGO CHESED FUND: $322,670 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetAGUDATH ISRAEL OF ILLINOIS: $239,072 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetPEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $200,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE KIEV JEWISH COMMUNITY: $160,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetHENRY & LOUISE MERMELSTEIN CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $120,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetCAMP NAGEELA MIDWEST INC: $107,170 over 3y, 3.9% of budgetCHICAGO MEZUZAH AND MITZVAH CAMPAIGN: $97,670 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetBEER YITZHAK FOUNDATION INC co Ben Malakh: $77,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MOSDOS NACHLAS SHIMON INC: $75,000 over 1y, 26% of budgetESTHER MILLER BAIS YAAKOV HIGH SCHOOL OF ST LOUIS: $38,250 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetVAAD HARABBANIM L'INYANEI TZEDUKA INC: $33,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMISSOURI TORAH INSTITUTE: $25,500 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetAGUDAH CAMPS INC: $20,204 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $12,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMESIVTA OF CLIFTON INC: $12,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetKULANU YACHAD: $11,000 over 1y, 4.7% 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.

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 FundJewish Communal FundTodd a and Raphaela S…The Goldman Sachs Cha…Daniel & Chayala Glen…Dennis and Joyce Rube…Fredman Family Charit…Jewish Federation of …Bitton Family Foundat…National Society for …Jack Adjmi Family Fou…Greater Horizons
The Ojc FundNY21× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · Todd a and Raphaela Stern Family Foundation · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · Daniel & Chayala Glenner Foundation · Dennis and Joyce Ruben Foundation · Fredman Family Charitable Trust · Jewish Federation of St Louis · Bitton Family Foundation Inc · National Society for Hebrew Day Schools · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Greater Horizons

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 Agudath Israel of Illinois funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Agudath Israel of Illinois. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%2%8%17%30%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
    4get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    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 Agudath Israel of Illinois?

    Find your warmest path to Agudath Israel of Illinois 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Agudath Israel of Illinois’ 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