Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Bnei Zipora Inc

Provide fund to other not-for-profit organization for real propertyimprovement and help them to achieve their goals.

$406k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$120k
Largest
01What you fund
0196% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20192025.

Religion$752kPhilanthropy$30kHealth$27kCommunity Improvement$13kEducation$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 4 grants below total $201,839 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $406,031 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $204,192 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 $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $74k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $120k
$47,089
Median grant
1
States reached
$36k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Bukharian Sephardic Jewish Ce$120,000
BETH ELIYAHU$47,089
BEACHWAY THERAPY CENTER$27,000
Individual grant recipient$7,750
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 96% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%PAYPAL CHARITABLE GIVING FUND: $30k → 8%BETH GAVRIEL BUKHARIAN CONGREGATION: $124k → 13%ROFEH CHOLIM CENTER: $25k → 20%BEACHWAY THERAPY CENTER: $27k → 11%OR PINHAS INC: $5k → 13%Bukharian Sephardic Jewish Ce: $120k → 15%BUKHARIAN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $41k → 13%BAIS MENACHEM: $10k → 20%CANADIAN IMPERIAL BANK: $13k → 11%770 MOSHIACH COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $7k → 13%BUKHARIAN SPHARDIC JEWISH CENTER: $110k → 15%BETH GAVRIEL BUKHARIAN CONGREGATION: $8k → 13%YESHIVAT OHEL TORAH: $14k → 20%BUKHARIAN SEPHARDIC JEWISH CENTER: $62k → 15%BETH GAVRIEL BUKHARIAN CONGREGATION: $8k → 13%BETH ELIYAHU: $47k → 15%BOKHARIAN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $7k → 13%MIAMI BEACH COMMUNITY KOLLEL: $11k → 15%BUKHARIAN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $5k → 13%KIPPAH DEPOT: $8k → 15%HOUSE OF TORAH JE INC: $13k → 13%SHALOM MONTESSORI SCHOOL: $10k → 15%SEPHARDIC CENTER OF HOLLIS HILLS: $6k → 13%CHABAD LUBAVITCH RUSSIAN CENTER: $49k → 15%CHABAD OF MIAMI GARDENS INC: $38k → 15%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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 — $185k 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.

North America (Canada and Mexico)$185k · 100% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: GENERAL PURPOSE

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

66%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$532k · 3 repeat orgs$278k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of -6% since the first grant, against -11% for the ones you funded once.

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
13

Total granted

$532k
$243k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-6%
-11%

Still filing today

33%
15%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $35k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’22’23’24’25
ReligionCommunity ImprovementOther

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

  • BS
    BUKHARIAN SEPHARDIC JEWISH CENTER OF MIAMI INC
    3× · 2020–2025 · $339k
  • BG
    BETH GAVRIEL BUKHARIAN CONGREGATION
    3× · 2019–2023 · $140k
  • BJ
    BOKHARIAN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $53k · revenue -6%

Funded once

  • CL
    CHABAD LUBAVITCH OF SUNNY ISLES BEACH INC
    one grant, 2024 · $49k
  • TM
    Torat Moshe Inc
    one grant, 2022 · $41k
  • CO
    CHABAD OF MIAMI GARDENS INC
    one grant, 2023 · $38k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
04the grantee network

4 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 4 of the 19 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
4/4
Grantees still filing
1/4
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

BUKHARIAN SEPHARDIC JEWISH CENTER OF MIAMI INC — $338,953 · OtherBUKHARIAN SEPHARDIC JEWISH CENTER OF MIAMI INCBETH GAVRIEL BUKHARIAN CONGREGATION — $139,906 · OtherBETH GAVRIEL BUKHARIAN CONGREGATIONBOKHARIAN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC — $53,237 · OtherBOKHARIAN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INCCHABAD LUBAVITCH OF SUNNY ISLES BEACH INC — $48,987 · OtherCHABAD LUBAVITCH OF SUNNY ISLES BEACH INCTorat Moshe Inc — $41,333 · OtherCHABAD OF MIAMI GARDENS INC — $38,385 · OtherBEACHWAY THERAPY CENTER LLC — $27,000 · Other+9 more — $101,166 · Other+9 morePAYPAL CHARITABLE GIVING FUND — $30,000 · PhilanthropyYESHIVAT OHEL TORAH — $13,694 · Religion770 MOSHIACH COMMUNITY CENTER INC — $7,100 · Community Improvement
Other$788,967Philanthropy$30,000Religion$13,694Community Improvement$7,100

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetBOKHARIAN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC — $53,237 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetPAYPAL CHARITABLE GIVING FUND — $30,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVAT OHEL TORAH — $13,694 over 1y, 0.2% of budget770 MOSHIACH COMMUNITY CENTER INC — $7,100 over 1y, 0.2% of budget
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 BOKHARIAN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC
  • Who funds PAYPAL CHARITABLE GIVING FUND
  • Who funds YESHIVAT OHEL TORAH
  • Who funds 770 MOSHIACH COMMUNITY CENTER INC

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.

Jewish Communal FundNY15.9× affinity7 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · The Ojc Fund · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Bnei Zipora 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 3%
  • 770 Moshiach Community Center Inc3% of 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 · 0–5%
typical government reliance, FY2025

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 19 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph