Skip to content

· Private foundation

Bzl Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$1.4M
Granted FY2021
59
Grants FY2021
—
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What it funds
0157% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Religion$1.4MEnvironment$33kHuman Services$28kHealth$19kInternational$13kPhilanthropy$5kEducation$4kFood & Nutrition$2kOther$0
02FY2021 · 59 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 59 grants below total $537,211, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,398,815 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $861,604 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 $10k48 grants · $97k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $231k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $209k
$2,000
Median grant
—
States reached
$6k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Yeshiva Ketane Imrei Chaim$100,000
Congregation Kollel Ahavas Yerusholayim$57,770
Cong Tfille Lmoshe of KJ$51,000
Tova Uvrucha Inc$44,300
Khal Toras Chaim-BP$43,250
Cong Khal Torath Chaim Viznitz Of Bp$33,000
Congregation Reb Meir Baal Hanes$26,200
Hasagah inc$25,000
Kollel Avreichim Of Brooklyn$24,000
Congregation Zwehil Of Monsey$20,450
Yeshiva Bnos Ahavas Israel$14,850
Chuppah$9,300
Congregation Ahavas Tzedakah Vchesed$6,056
Cong Vein of Monsey$5,500
Congregation Oseh Choyil Inc$5,400
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 (FY17–18, $21k) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Israel Medical Fund: $2k → 17%Keren Halbusha: $10k → 20%A Time: $3k → 20%Keren Halbusha: $500 → 20%A Time: $260 → 20%Bonei Olam: $4k → 20%Misaskim: $1k → 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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 93 repeat orgs$629k to everyone else

93 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2021, 84 since wound down; 50 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

93
212

Total granted

$1.7M
$254k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+27%
+97%

Still filing today

6%
6%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 30% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $375k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’21
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’21
ReligionHuman ServicesHealthEducationPublic BenefitYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • YO
    YESHIVAS OHR V'DAAS
    2× · 2017–2018 · $18k · revenue +13%
  • CV
    CHAYIM V CHESED
    2× · 2017–2018 · $14k · revenue +139%
  • MS
    MOSDOS SHOMREI EMUNIM INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $5k · revenue +27%

Funded once

  • CM
    Congregation Mikvah Taharah
    one grant, 2018 · $15k
  • CK
    Congregation Khal Ahavas Shalom
    one grant, 2017 · $12k
  • BR
    Bais Rochel of Antwerp
    one grant, 2017 · $12k
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
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
3
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
4
Ohr Yisrael Yeshiva Inc

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

Religion
5
Sherit Isroel
—
6
Chabad Lametayel Inc

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

—
7
Rashbi Tehillim Incorporated
Religion
8
Mishken Chaim Rivnits

Assistance to the indigent

Religion
9
Shaarei Halacha Inc
Philanthropy
10
Gemilas Chesed Kramer Inc
Philanthropy
11
The Yad Moach Vlev Foundation
Philanthropy
12
Chevras Shabbos Kodesh Podcast Fellowship
Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mosdos Shomrei Emunim Inc; the most unlike its peers is Ohr Torah 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

21 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. 21 of the 355 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/21
Grantees still filing
17/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MOSDOS VIZNITZ: $328,200 · OtherMOSDOS VIZNITZIndividual grant recipient: $268,554 · OtherIndividual grant recipientYeshiva Ketane Imrei Chaim: $105,400 · Other+185 more: $1,572,307 · Other+185 moreYESHIVAS OHR V'DAAS: $18,250 · ReligionCHAYIM V CHESED: $14,300 · ReligionEMET VESHALOM INC: $6,000 · ReligionKEREN HALBUSHA INC: $10,500 · Human ServicesBonei Olam Inc: $3,600 · Human ServicesA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $3,260 · Human ServicesISRAEL MEDICAL FUND CORP: $2,160 · Human ServicesMISASKIM CORP: $1,000 · Human ServicesMEKIMI: $3,600 · HealthCHAI LIFELINE INC: $1,800 · HealthSERVICES FOR CHILDREN WITH HIDDEN INTELLIGENCE: $1,800 · EducationYESHIVA TALPIOT INC: $1,000 · Education
Other$2,274,461Religion$38,550Human Services$20,520Health$5,400Education$2,800

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%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCHAYIM V CHESED: $14,300 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetKEREN HALBUSHA INC: $10,500 over 2y, 9.0% of budgetMOSDOS SHOMREI EMUNIM INC: $5,001 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetMEKIMI: $3,600 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetBonei Olam Inc: $3,600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $3,260 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetISRAEL MEDICAL FUND CORP: $2,160 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $1,800 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSERVICES FOR CHILDREN WITH HIDDEN INTELLIGENCE: $1,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMISASKIM CORP: $1,000 over 1y, 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 YESHIVAS OHR V'DAAS ↗
  • Who funds CHAYIM V CHESED ↗

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 FundNY78.4× affinity71 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 · Chayim V Chesed · Ani Mamin Foundation · Hf Foundation · Zichron Yechiel Mechel Foundation · American Friends of Bnai Levy Foundation · Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation · Zichron Simcha Dsassov · The Lexicon Foundation Inc · B&M Steinmetz Foundation · Guardian Family Foundation 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 Bzl Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bzl Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Bzl Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Bzl Foundation 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 355 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 (FY2025) is on record and reports $3.6M of grant expense with no grantee named in the published copy. A private foundation itemizes every grant it makes, so a return carrying none has filed its list as an attachment that the public copy does not include. The figures above are therefore from FY2021, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Bzl’s filings →

    More from the funding graph