Skip to content
B & T Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

B & T Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$25k
Granted FY2021
16
Grants FY2021
3
States reached
$13k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0187% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Religion$75kInternational$9kHuman Services$5kPhilanthropy$626Other$0
02FY2021 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 16 grants below total $18,328, the rows itemized in this filing. The $25,401 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $7,073 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 · FY2021

  • Under $10k15 grants · $6k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $13k
$250
Median grant
3
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Podeh Umatzel Inc$12,500
American Friends of Kupat Hair$2,500
American Friends of Yeshiva Tiferes$700
American Friends of Bais Soroh Schnierer$360
Univ Ohel Mordechai Dtosh$280
Cong Ahavas Tzdokah Vchesed$280
Tomche Shabbos of Boro Park$256
Yeshiva Beer Avrohom Kollel$250
Shuvu$250
Congregation Toras Chaim Inc$250
American Friends of Manchester$180
Congregation Nachlas Maharim Stretin$125
American Friends of Dvar Shalom$125
Ptach$100
Tomchei Torah of Gur Aryeh$100
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 (FY17–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 95% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%Talmud Torah Tashbar Nachlas Chaim: $860 → 14%Mesivta Tifereth Jerusalam of Amer: $360 → 17%Ohr Sarah: $360 → 20%AF of Yeshiva Tiferes Yisroel: $2k → 7%Cong Forest Glen Zichron Mattel: $2k → 11%Lehava RCTT: $3k → 14%Nachlas Bnei Shimon: $250 → 20%Yeshiva Gedolah Bais Mordechai: $1k → 7%CCK Charity Foundation: $2k → 14%See attached: $53k → 20%See attached: $39k → 20%See attached: $19k → 20%See attached: $48k → 20%Podeh Umatzel Inc: $30k → 20%Beit Midrash Shaarei Yosher: $2k → 20%Congregation Toras Chaim: $1k → 20%Friends Of Ohr Matityahu: $1k → 20%American Friends of Kupat Hair: $5k → 20%Khal Chasidei Lelov: $700 → 20%Congregation Bais Mifal Yosef: $5k → 20%Shuvu: $500 → 20%Kupat Hair Bnei Bereq: $1k → 20%Yeshiva Korlin-Stolin: $430 → 20%Yeshiva Mesivta Torah Temima: $3k → 20%Keren Ahavas Chessed: $2k → 20%Cong Lev Avr: $2k → 20%Friends of Zichron Meir Inc: $1k → 20%Yeshiva Derech Chaim: $300 → 20%Yeshiva of Brooklyn Girls Division: $360 → 20%Mesivta Yeshiva Rabbi Chaim Berlin: $180 → 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.
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.

63%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$58k · 5 repeat orgs$34k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +52% since the first grant, against +33% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2021, 0 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
30

Total granted

$58k
$31k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+52%
+33%

Still filing today

40%
23%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’20’21
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’20’21
PhilanthropyReligionInternationalHuman 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

  • PU
    PODEH UMATZEL INC
    3× · 2017–2021 · $48k · revenue -9%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF KUPAT HA'IR
    3× · 2017–2021 · $8k · revenue +52%
  • CT
    CONGREGATION TORAS CHAIM INC
    3× · 2017–2021 · $2k

Funded once

  • CB
    Congregation Bais Mifal Yosef
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
  • YM
    Yeshiva Mesivta Torah Temima
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
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
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
3
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
4
American Friends of Shviti Hashem Inc

To support and promote the study of torah (bible) among members of jewish faith worldwide.

Religion
5
Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Tal Hashamayim Foundation
Religion
7
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
8
Tzemach Yifroch Foundation
—
9
Chevras Shabbos Kodesh Podcast Fellowship
Religion
10
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
11
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
12
American Friends of Amaleh Shel Torah Inc

None

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Friends of Kupat Ha'ir; the most unlike its peers is The Light Foundation Inc. 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 46 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)
10/10
Grantees still filing
7/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PODEH UMATZEL INC: $47,500 · ReligionPODEH UMATZEL INCAMERICAN FRIENDS OF KUPAT HA'IR: $7,554 · ReligionAMERICAN FRIENDS OF KUPAT HA'IRCongregation Bais Mifal Yosef: $4,600 · OtherCongregation Bais Mifal YosefYeshiva Mesivta Torah Temima: $3,300 · OtherYeshiva Mesivta Torah TemimaIndividual grant recipient: $2,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCCK Charity Foundation: $2,000 · OtherCCK Charity FoundationCong Forest Glen Zichron Mattel: $2,000 · OtherCong Forest Glen Zichron MattelBeit Midrash Shaarei Yosher: $1,800 · OtherBeit Midrash Shaarei YosherAF of Yeshiva Tiferes Yisroel: $1,800 · OtherAF of Yeshiva Tiferes YisroelKEREN AHAVAS CHESED: $1,800 · OtherKEREN AHAVAS CHESEDCONGREGATION TORAS CHAIM INC: $1,660 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $1,500 · Other+27 more: $9,926 · Other+27 moreFRIENDS OF ZICHRON MEIR INC FRIENDS OF ZICHRON MEIR: $1,300 · PhilanthropySHUVU RETURN INC: $500 · PhilanthropyTHE LIGHT FOUNDATION INC: $126 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN FRIENDS OF DVAR SHALOM: $125 · PhilanthropyFRIENDS OF OHR MATITYAHU: $1,000 · InternationalYESHIVAS NACHLAS BNEI SHIMON: $250 · InternationalBOBBIES PLACE INC: $54 · Human Services
Religion$55,054Other$32,886Philanthropy$2,051International$1,250Human Services$54

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 budgetPODEH UMATZEL INC: $47,500 over 3y, 4.8% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF KUPAT HA'IR: $7,554 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF OHR MATITYAHU: $1,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetSHUVU RETURN INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA DERECH CHAIM: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE LIGHT FOUNDATION INC: $126 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF DVAR SHALOM: $125 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 PODEH UMATZEL INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF KUPAT HA'IR ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF ZICHRON MEIR INC FRIENDS OF ZICHRON MEIR ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF OHR MATITYAHU ↗
  • Who funds SHUVU RETURN INC ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA DERECH CHAIM ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVAS NACHLAS BNEI SHIMON ↗
  • Who funds THE LIGHT FOUNDATION 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…Jsw FoundationAllen I Gross Charita…Zichron Chaim Charity…National Philanthropi…Fidelity Investments …
The Ojc FundNY23.5× affinity10 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Jsw Foundation · Allen I Gross Charitable Foundation · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization B & T Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from B & T Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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.

    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 46 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 2021, released 2021. 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 no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2021, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on B & T’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