Skip to content

· Private foundation

Bais Ephraim Charitable Foundation Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$3.4M
Granted FY2025still arriving
77
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$675k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Religion$5.4MEducation$5.2MArts & Culture$3.0MInternational$452kPhilanthropy$428kHuman Services$223kPublic Safety & Disaster$160kHealth$158kOther$0
02FY2025 · 77 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k23 grants · $131k
  • $10k–50k42 grants · $780k
  • $50k–250k9 grants · $974k
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.5M
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$78M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Global Center of Square$675,000
Various Charities$446,948
Cong Ahavas Tzdokah V'Chesed$393,000
Chayim Vchessed$184,400
Individual grant recipient$172,000
M L T Y$150,000
EPI$150,000
Individual grant recipient$86,500
OJC Fund$67,000
KZM$64,000
Congregation Ohr Meir$50,000
Tova Uvrucha$50,000
Yeshiva Darchei Torah$40,000
Cong Beis Yisroel Premishlan$39,000
Keren Torah Vchessed$36,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY25–25, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Chaim Medical Resource: $10k → 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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$12M · 74 repeat orgs$2.5M to everyone else

74 repeat relationships: 42 still active in FY2025, 32 since wound down; 32 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

74
78

Total granted

$12M
$2.0M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+13%
+18%

Still filing today

18%
8%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $422k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
ReligionInternationalPhilanthropyHealthEducationCrime & LegalOther
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

  • CV
    CHAYIM V CHESED
    4× · 2020–2025 · $223k · revenue +85%
  • MH
    MOSDOS HATORAH VHACHESED OF PNEI MENACHEM INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $125k · revenue +152%
  • RH
    REFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES
    4× · 2020–2025 · $79k · revenue +115%

Funded once

  • AC
    AMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SANZ INSTITUTIONS IN ISRAEL INC
    one grant, 2023 · $400k · revenue -32%
  • V
    VARIOUS
    one grant, 2020 · $211k
  • AY
    Ahavat Yisroel Humanity Fund Inc
    one grant, 2022 · $110k
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
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
3
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
4
American Friends of Yeshivat Hakotel Inc

To support religious, charitable, scientific, literary and/or educational programs

Education
5
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
6
Ohr Yisrael Yeshiva Inc

Ohr Yisrael is a religious institution that provides religious services and instruction to Rabbis and community members.

Religion
7
Ohr Avrohom and Moshe Inc

We support religious organizations in the us and israel by providing grants.

Public Benefit
8
Ohr Olam Corp

publish religious books

Religion
9
Yeshiva Yismach Moshe

Raise funds for religious and educational institutions in the state of israel, and to provide funds to needy individuals in the state of israel.

International
10
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
11
American Friends of Amshinover Yeshiva Jerusalem Inc

Support of religious schools in Israel

International
12
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Friends of Yeshiva Dmir Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Ranch At Bethel 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

25 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 25 of the 185 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)
11
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/25
Grantees still filing
17/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Global Center of Square: $2,825,000 · OtherGlobal Center of SquareVarious Charities: $1,751,813 · OtherVarious CharitiesCHAIM V CHESED: $1,265,800 · OtherCHAIM V CHESEDCONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INC: $1,015,600 · OtherCONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INCM L T Y: $670,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $594,000 · Other+159 more: $5,235,900 · Other+159 moreCHAYIM V CHESED: $222,700 · ReligionTHE RANCH AT BETHEL INC: $112,000 · ReligionMOSDOS PNEI MENACHEM INC: $90,000 · ReligionAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BH FOUNDATION INC: $55,000 · ReligionFriends of Bobov Toronto Inc: $34,000 · ReligionYESHIVAS OHR V'DAAS: $31,400 · Religion+3 more: $23,850 · ReligionTHE OJC FUND: $417,000 · EducationDRESSED WITH DIGNITY INC: $58,567 · EducationAMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SANZ INSTITUTIONS IN ISRAEL INC: $400,000 · InternationalKEREN TORAH VCHESED: $36,000 · International+2 more: $19,000 · InternationalMOSDOS HATORAH VHACHESED OF PNEI MENACHEM INC: $125,000 · PhilanthropyRockland Foundation: $24,280 · PhilanthropyPaamonim: $5,720 · PhilanthropyREFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES: $79,000 · HealthZICHRON CHAIM INC: $10,000 · Youth Development
Other$13,358,113Religion$568,950Education$475,567International$455,000Philanthropy$155,000Health$79,000Youth Development$10,000

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 budgetTHE OJC FUND: $417,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SANZ INSTITUTIONS IN ISRAEL INC: $400,000 over 1y, 7.0% of budgetCHAYIM V CHESED: $222,700 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetMOSDOS HATORAH VHACHESED OF PNEI MENACHEM INC: $125,000 over 2y, 2.3% of budgetMOSDOS PNEI MENACHEM INC: $90,000 over 2y, 2.2% of budgetREFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES: $79,000 over 4y, 1.7% of budgetDRESSED WITH DIGNITY INC: $58,567 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BH FOUNDATION INC: $55,000 over 4y, 24% of budgetBEER HAGOLAH INSTITUTES INC: $50,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetFriends of Bobov Toronto Inc: $34,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetYESHIVAS OHR V'DAAS: $31,400 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetRockland Foundation: $24,280 over 3y, 10% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF KUPAT HA'IR: $13,850 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetZICHRON CHAIM INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BNOS YEHUDIS IN: $10,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA DMIR INC: $9,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPaamonim: $5,720 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetYAAZORU INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF ISH EL RAYAHU: $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetTHE ALEPH INSTITUTE INC: $3,600 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 THE OJC FUND ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SANZ INSTITUTIONS IN ISRAEL INC ↗
  • Who funds CHAYIM V CHESED ↗
  • Who funds MOSDOS HATORAH VHACHESED OF PNEI MENACHEM INC ↗
  • Who funds MOSDOS PNEI MENACHEM INC ↗
  • Who funds REFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES ↗
  • Who funds DRESSED WITH DIGNITY 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 FundNY67.6× affinity51 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · B&M Steinmetz Foundation · Yr Foundation Trust · Zichron Yechiel Mechel Foundation · The Strasbourg Foundation · Murray & Sydell Rosenberg Foundationinc · Zichron Simcha Dsassov · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · Donors Fund Inc · Keren Yud Mem Inc

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 Bais Ephraim Charitable Foundation Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bais Ephraim Charitable Foundation Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • The Aleph Institute Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
2report 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.

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 185 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Bais Ephraim’s filings →

More from the funding graph