Skip to content
Ahavas Tzedokos Corp at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Ahavas Tzedokos Corp

To distribute funds to needy families to help ensure that they are provided with basic food and clothing needs.

$3.8M
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$132k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Religion$4.1MPhilanthropy$775kHuman Services$43kEducation$14kCrime & Legal$13k
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $199,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $3,849,178 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $3,650,178 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.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $17k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $182k
$50,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$965k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHIZUK USA$132,000
OLAM HATZEDAKA$50,000
CONGREGATION KNESSET SIMCHA$17,000
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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 57% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%CHABAD OF CALIFORNIA: $7k → 14%Cong Kollel Knesses Yisroel: $60k → 11%CONGREGATION BINAS YISASCHOR: $25k → 14%UTA OF KJ: $6k → 14%Sifrei Algazi: $656k → 20%CHIZUK USA: $496k → 11%Chasdei Meshilem: $380k → 20%THE DONORS FUND: $360k → 11%SIFREI ALGAZI: $271k → 20%THE DONORS FUND: $280k → 11%SIFREI ALGAZI: $107k → 20%CHIZUK USA: $132k → 11%BRITISH FRIENDS OF TIFERES CHAIM: $10k → 20%CHIZUK USA: $115k → 11%BNEI YERUSHALAIM: $10k → 20%CHIZUK USA: $101k → 11%JERUSALEM OPEN HOUSE: $9k → 20%THE DONORS FUND: $85k → 11%CONGREGATION KNESSET SIMCHA: $17k → 20%Cong Zichron Moshe: $60k → 11%YAD LACHMU ANYU LENITZRUCHIM: $10k → 20%OLAM HATZEDAKA: $50k → 11%BINYAN YERUSHLAIM: $671k → 20%NEOT YAAKOV INC: $50k → 11%BINYAN YERUSHLAIM: $90k → 20%TORAH VCHESED: $48k → 11%BINYAN YERUSHLAIM: $46k → 20%TOMCHEI TZEDAKAH: $31k → 11%BINYAN YERUSHLAIM: $35k → 20%CHIZUK USA: $25k → 11%MOSDOT BOTOSHAN INC: $16k → 20%TIFERES BAIS YAAKOV INC: $14k → 11%Bikur cholim Gemilus Chesed Trust: $10k → 20%TIFERES BAIS YAAKOV INC: $14k → 11%Or Hatalmud Inc: $30k → 20%CONG ZICHRONE BINYAMIN: $13k → 11%Machon Beth Meir: $6k → 20%TOMCHEI TZEDAKAH: $12k → 11%TZEDUKA V CHESED: $13k → 20%ZICHRON REFOEL: $12k → 11%CONG KOZOVER: $92k → 20%Cong Yetev Lev DSatmar: $10k → 11%CONG KOZOVER: $64k → 20%Tashbar of Lakewood: $9k → 11%GOMEL CHESED: $23k → 20%TORAH VCHESED: $6k → 11%CONG BAIS YISROEL: $9k → 20%Chizuk USA: $6k → 11%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.

Grants abroad, by region: $530k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Region not stated$530k · 100% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CHARITY TO INDIGENTS

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

73%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.0M · 7 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
27

Total granted

$3.0M
$1.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+5%

Still filing today

14%
15%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $67k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
ReligionPhilanthropyEducationOther
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

  • SA
    SIFREI ALGAZI
    3× · 2019–2021 · $1.0M
  • CU
    CHIZUK USA INC
    6× · 2019–2025 · $875k
  • BY
    BINYAN YERUSHLAIM
    4× · 2020–2023 · $842k

Funded once

  • CM
    CHASDEI MESHILAM
    one grant, 2019 · $380k
  • CM
    CHASADAI MESHILEM INC
    one grant, 2020 · $280k
  • CZ
    CONGREGATION ZICHRON MOSHE INC
    one grant, 2019 · $60k
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
Toras Chaim Development Company Inc

Provide a building for a religious school.

Education
2
Yeshiva Toras Chaim of Greater Miami Inc

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

Education
3
Yeshiva Gedola Na'os Yaakov

A post-secondary school offering an educational program in talmudic study

Education
4
Birchas Yaakov Kollel Inc

Maintain communal and charitable affairs in accordance with the tradition of the orthodox jewish faith

—
5
Toras Chaim Inc

To give grants to religious & educational institutions.

Religion
6
Mifal Tzedaka Vchesed Chasdei Aharo N Inc

Provide financial assistance to torah and talmudic scholars, as well as to other needy individuals and other organizations that work to promote these purposes.

Philanthropy
7
Yeshivah Beth Israel Tifereth Menachem Foundation

To provide support to jewish religious education in israel and around the world, and provide financial assistance to and on behalf of yeshivah beth israel tifereth menachem.

Education
8
Yeshiva Toras Chaim Inc

The organization operates a religious/parochial high school and college in lakewood, nj.

Unclassified
9
Yeshiva Toras Aron Inc

Yeshiva toras aron is a religious elementary school providing quality education for grades k-8 for the children of lakewood nj.

Education
10
Yeshiva Tiferes Boruch

A jewish secondary school which seeks to inculcate its students with high character and religious values to produce future religious leaders

—
11
Tzidkas Binyomin Inc

Tzidkas Binyamin is organized for charitable, religious and educational purposes, to assist Jewish orthodox institutions and needy individuals in need of financial aid.

Philanthropy
12
Talmud Torah Tzfat Inc

We make grants to support orthodox jewish education.

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Tomchei Tzedaka Corp; the most unlike its peers is Olam Hatzedaka Corp. 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

10 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. 10 of the 37 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SIFREI ALGAZI: $1,034,765 · OtherSIFREI ALGAZICHIZUK USA INC: $875,004 · OtherCHIZUK USA INCBINYAN YERUSHLAIM: $842,242 · OtherBINYAN YERUSHLAIMCHASDEI MESHILAM: $380,000 · OtherCHASDEI MESHILAMCHASADAI MESHILEM INC: $280,000 · OtherCHASADAI MESHILEM INCCONGREGATION KOZOVER ZICHRON CHAIM SHLOIME: $156,000 · Other+22 more: $417,344 · Other+22 moreDONORS FUND INC: $725,000 · PhilanthropyDONORS FUND INCNEOT YAAKOV INC: $49,698 · PhilanthropyNEOT YAAKOV INC+1 more: $5,500 · PhilanthropyOLAM HATZEDAKA CORP: $50,000 · ReligionTOMCHEI TZEDAKA CORP: $42,873 · ReligionUTA OF KJ BC INC: $5,729 · ReligionTORAS CHESED INC: $5,310 · ReligionTIFERES BAIS YAAKOV INC: $27,210 · EducationBETH MEDRASH GOVOHA OF LAKEWOOD INC: $5,336 · Education
Other$3,985,355Philanthropy$780,198Religion$103,912Education$32,546

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetDONORS FUND INC: $725,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTOMCHEI TZEDAKA CORP: $42,873 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTIFERES BAIS YAAKOV INC: $27,210 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetTASHBAR OF LAKEWOOD INC: $9,100 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMACHON BETH MEIR: $5,500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetBETH MEDRASH GOVOHA OF LAKEWOOD INC: $5,336 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTORAS CHESED INC: $5,310 over 1y, 0.1% 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 DONORS FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds OLAM HATZEDAKA CORP ↗
  • Who funds NEOT YAAKOV INC ↗
  • Who funds TOMCHEI TZEDAKA CORP ↗
  • Who funds TIFERES BAIS YAAKOV INC ↗
  • Who funds TASHBAR OF LAKEWOOD INC ↗
  • Who funds UTA OF KJ BC INC ↗
  • Who funds MACHON BETH MEIR ↗
  • Who funds BETH MEDRASH GOVOHA OF LAKEWOOD INC ↗
  • Who funds TORAS CHESED 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.

Donors Fund IncThe Ojc FundJewish Communal FundJack Adjmi Family Fou…Marbeh Shalom Foundat…The Jmg FoundationNational Society for …The Setton FoundationFund for Life Foundat…The Ohr Hakotel Found…Regina Goldwasser Fou…Zichron Btz Tzedakah …
Donors Fund IncNJ31.9× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donors Fund Inc · The Ojc Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Marbeh Shalom Foundation Inc · The Jmg Foundation · National Society for Hebrew Day Schools · The Setton Foundation · Fund for Life Foundation Inc · The Ohr Hakotel Foundation · Regina Goldwasser Foundation · Zichron Btz Tzedakah Foundation

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 Ahavas Tzedokos Corp funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ahavas Tzedokos Corp. Bigger dots raise more.

2022
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 50%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 37%
  • Tiferes Bais Yaakov Inc: 37% of income from government
  • Tashbar of Lakewood Inc: 28% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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.

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 37 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Ahavas Tzedokos’ 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