Skip to content

· Private foundation

Bracha Vehatzlacha Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$247k
Granted FY2024still arriving
90
Grants FY2024still arriving
14
States reached
$89k
Largest
01What it funds
0190% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Religion$830kHuman Services$39kEnvironment$18kPhilanthropy$15kHealth$7kEducation$7kYouth Development$6kArts & Culture$3kOther$0
02FY2024 · 90 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k86 grants · $115k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $44k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $89k
$650
Median grant
14
States reached
$33k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Chabad of Mar Vista$88,600
Cong Toldos Yaakov Yosef$19,500
CCSY$13,500
Congregation Lubavitch$10,650
Individual grant recipient$8,886
Chabad of Eastern Queens$6,500
Refuah Resources$6,500
Individual grant recipient$6,250
Individual grant recipient$5,000
Colel Chabad$5,000
Goodness Kindness$5,000
Chasdei Avrohom Eliezer$4,000
Ezras Israel$3,770
Individual grant recipient$3,714
Individual grant recipient$3,650
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 (FY17–24, $30k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Bikur Cholim of Crown Heights: $13k → 20%Bikur Cholim of Crown Heights: $4k → 20%Bikur Cholim of Crown Heights: $3k → 20%Chasdei Avrohom Eliezer: $4k → 20%Chasdei Avrohom Eliezer: $4k → 20%Vaad Hakol of Crown Heights: $1k → 20%The Balance International: $300 → 20%Kimpatorin Aid: $200 → 20%Kimpatorin Aid: $100 → 20%Bonei Olam: $500 → 20%Misaskim: $300 → 20%Misaskim: $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.

Which US states its grants reach

AK
ME
WA
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
CA
CO
VA
AZ
TN
NC
SC
TX
FL
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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$788k · 87 repeat orgs$184k to everyone else

87 repeat relationships: 49 still active in FY2024, 38 since wound down; 41 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

87
142

Total granted

$788k
$140k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+32%
+46%

Still filing today

13%
9%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $43k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’22’23’24
ReligionHuman ServicesPhilanthropyEducationHealthArts & CultureOther
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

  • BC
    BIKUR CHOLIM OF CROWN HEIGHTS
    3× · 2022–2024 · $20k · revenue +53%
  • KU
    Keren Uforatzto Inc
    3× · 2022–2024 · $8k · revenue +20%
  • CA
    CHASDEI AVROHOM ELIEZER INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $8k · revenue +41%

Funded once

  • TT
    Talmud Torah Zecher Yochenon
    one grant, 2022 · $9k
  • NC
    NJ Center for Judaic Studies
    one grant, 2023 · $8k
  • VH
    VAAD HANOCHOS HATMIMIM INC
    one grant, 2022 · $6k
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
Gemilas Chesed Kramer Inc
Philanthropy
2
Chabad Lametayel Inc

encourage and facilitate the observance of traditional orthodox Jewish practices around the world.

—
3
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
4
Ohr Olam Corp

publish religious books

Religion
5
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
6
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
7
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
8
Shaarei Halacha Inc
Philanthropy
9
Chevrah Lomdei Mishnah Inc

Promoting study of Mishnah and other Jewish texts

Religion
10
Ohr Yisrael Yeshiva Inc

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

Religion
11
Chevras Shabbos Kodesh Podcast Fellowship
Religion
12
Noam Shabbos Inc

To provide financial and other assistance to needy persons and families in Israel

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Eizer Chaim Yom Tov Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Sorala Foundation. 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

31 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. 31 of the 270 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
28/31
Grantees still filing
19/31
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHABAD OF MAR VISTA: $279,685 · OtherCHABAD OF MAR VISTABNOS MENACHEM INC: $71,300 · OtherBNOS MENACHEM INC+176 more: $520,373 · Other+176 moreBRIS AVROHOM INC: $26,000 · ReligionKeren Uforatzto Inc: $7,644 · ReligionChayenu Inc: $5,000 · Religion+5 more: $2,980 · ReligionBIKUR CHOLIM OF CROWN HEIGHTS: $20,000 · Human ServicesCHASDEI AVROHOM ELIEZER INC: $7,600 · Human Services+5 more: $2,580 · Human ServicesSHARE OF NEW SQUARE INC DBA CHESED 247: $5,000 · Food & NutritionRABBINICAL COLLEGE OF AMERICA: $2,000 · EducationMENACHEM EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $2,000 · EducationTHE SORALA FOUNDATION: $2,000 · PhilanthropyROFEH CHOLIM CANCER SOCIETY INC: $1,000 · PhilanthropyYETEV LEV INC: $350 · PhilanthropyJEWISH CHILDRENS MUSEUM: $2,900 · Arts & Culture
Other$871,358Religion$41,624Human Services$30,180Food & Nutrition$5,000Education$4,000Philanthropy$3,350Arts & Culture$2,900

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBRIS AVROHOM INC: $26,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetBIKUR CHOLIM OF CROWN HEIGHTS: $20,000 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetKeren Uforatzto Inc: $7,644 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetCHASDEI AVROHOM ELIEZER INC: $7,600 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetSHARE OF NEW SQUARE INC DBA CHESED 247: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetChayenu Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetJEWISH CHILDRENS MUSEUM: $2,900 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetRABBINICAL COLLEGE OF AMERICA: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMENACHEM EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAGUDAS TOV V'CHESED INC: $1,200 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetROFEH CHOLIM CANCER SOCIETY INC: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHABAD ON CAMPUS INTERNATIONAL INC: $610 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBonei Olam Inc: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKESHER INC: $500 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetKAPAYIM INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAISH GLOBAL INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMISASKIM CORP: $480 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLev Leyeled Inc: $360 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetChabad of Bensonhurst Inc: $360 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetThe Balance International Corporation: $300 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetKIMPATORIN AID INC: $300 over 2y, 0.0% 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 BRIS AVROHOM INC ↗
  • Who funds BIKUR CHOLIM OF CROWN HEIGHTS ↗
  • Who funds Keren Uforatzto Inc ↗
  • Who funds CHASDEI AVROHOM ELIEZER INC ↗
  • Who funds SHARE OF NEW SQUARE INC DBA CHESED 247 ↗
  • Who funds Chayenu 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 FundNY40.4× affinity35 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Barber Family Foundation · Nash Charity Foundation Inc · Lets Make It Happen Ny Inc · Rebbe's Partnership Foundation · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Saul Schottenstein Foundation C · Huberfeld Family Foundation · Eom - Freund Family Foundation · Li Hakesef Foundation · Jla Charitable Foundation · Maon Noam 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 Bracha Vehatzlacha Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bracha Vehatzlacha Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
  • Rabbinical College of America: 5% 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 · 0–25%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Bracha Vehatzlacha Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Bracha Vehatzlacha Foundation Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

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 270 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Bracha Vehatzlacha’s filings →

More from the funding graph