· Public charity
American Friends of Netanya Inc
Support of educational institutions and 501(c)(3) organizations
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 6 grants below total $61,411 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $154,440 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $93,029 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k2 grants · $13k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $48k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MOSDOS YAAKOV VYISROEL | $15,500 |
| CONGREGATION KESSER BAIS YAAKOV | $12,000 |
| CONGREGATION BNEI YEHUDA | $10,461 |
| TALMUDICAL ACADEMY OF NJ | $10,000 |
| YESHIVA CHAYEI OLAM | $7,450 |
| TOURO COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY | $6,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY20–23, $62k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Grants abroad, by region — $66k 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.
Stated purpose: EDUCATIONAL
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your 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.
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 +24% since the first grant, against +18% for the ones you funded once.
23 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
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 FY2025, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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.” Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.
Backed again, and grew
- CSCHASDEI SHIMON INC4× · 2020–2023 · $53k · revenue +121%
- MYMosdos Yaakov Vyisroel3× · 2023–2025 · $37k · revenue +36%
- TATALMUDICAL ACADEMY3× · 2023–2025 · $37k · revenue +43%
Funded once
- CVCHANUN VRACHUMone grant, 2021 · $38k
- BABMG ALUMNI INCone grant, 2017 · $22k
- CACONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INCone grant, 2018 · $18k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS 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 matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
To operate a religious school for high school and post high school students.
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.
Support of religious schools in Israel
Religious Teaching
Provide a building for a religious school.
Providing secular and religious education for elementary and high school aged students
Organization raises funds which are disbursed to religious schools of higher education and talmudic research
The funding of heichal yerushalayim yeshiva(religious shcool) to facilitate and promote judaic studies.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Yeshiva Toras Chaim Inc and the most unlike its peers is Friends of Mosdot Limmudei Lottie Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 16 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
23 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 23 of the 51 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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 CHASDEI SHIMON INC ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA TORAS CHAIM INC ↗
- Who funds Mosdos Yaakov Vyisroel ↗
- Who funds TALMUDICAL ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds CHEDER TORAS ZEV ↗
- Who funds American Friends of the Morris M Horowitz Kollel ↗
- Who funds TOURO UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA GEDOLA NA'OS YAAKOV ↗
- Who funds BAIS MEDRASH ZICHRON MEIR INC ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA CHAYEI OLAM ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF KESHER INC ↗
- Who funds CHABAD LUBAVITCH MITZVAH TANK ↗
- Who funds YESHIVAS NER MOSHE ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF MOSDOT LIMMUDEI LOTTIE INC ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA EITZ CHAIM OF HILLSIDE INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA TIFERES CHAIM INC ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA HEICHAL HATORAH INC ↗
- Who funds HADAR BAIS YAAKOV INC ↗
- Who funds TORAS SHRAGA INC DBA YESHIVA KINYAN HATORAH ↗
- Who funds American Friends of Yeshiva Gedolah Matisyahu Inc ↗
- Who funds AHAVAS TZEDOKOS CORP ↗
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: The Ojc Fund · Donors Fund Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · Toras Chesed Inc · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Harry H Beren Foundation Ig · Sff Foundation · The Zev and Susan Munk Family Foundation · Gemach of Jackson Inc · The Moshe and Frady Kalter Foundation Inc C/O Moshe Kalter · Tidewater Jewish Foundation Inc
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.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization American Friends of Netanya Inc funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Cheder Toras Zev — 22% of income from government
- Yeshiva Chayei Olam — 10% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.