Skip to content
Chabad of Argentina Relief Appeal at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Chabad of Argentina Relief Appeal

To assist in providing funding for educational and charitable institutions.

$3.1M
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$260k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

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

International$3.1MReligion$1.3MEducation$35kYouth Development$15kOther$0
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 8 grants below total $388,703, the rows itemized in this filing. The $3,051,313 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $2,662,610 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $11k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $118k
  • $250k+1 grant · $260k
$25,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EZRAT ISRAEL$260,000
MACHON STAM$35,000
BEIT CHABAD ALMAGRO INC$30,000
ALEPH KOSHER INC$25,000
FRIENDS OF JEWISH COMMUNITY OF TUCH$17,880
FEDERATION OF JEWISH COMMUNITIES$10,003
CHABAD LUBAVITCH OF PEMBROKE PINES$5,500
CHABAD OF MIDTOWN$5,320
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 (FY24–24, $18k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, 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%FRIENDS OF JEWISH COMMUNITY OF TUCH: $18k → 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.

Grants abroad, by region: $2.6M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

South America$2.6M · 98% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: GRANTS TO HUMANITARI

Middle East and North Africa$30k · 1% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: EDUCATION

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$18k · 1% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: GRANTS TO HUMANITARI

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. 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.6M · 3 repeat orgs$939k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +39% since the first grant, against +4% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
15

Total granted

$3.6M
$820k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
+4%

Still filing today

33%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 69% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $119k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
ReligionInternationalPhilanthropyHuman ServicesYouth 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

  • EI
    EZRAT ISRAEL INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $3.5M
  • FO
    FEDERATION OF JEWISH COMMUNITIES OF THE CIS INC
    3× · 2021–2024 · $24k · revenue +39%
  • BM
    BNOS MENACHEM INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $23k

Funded once

  • CL
    CHABAD LUBAVITCH OF GREATER FORT LAUDERDALE INC
    one grant, 2022 · $400k
  • TI
    TOMCHEI ISRAEL
    one grant, 2021 · $175k · revenue +4%
  • KP
    KEREN PEULOS
    one grant, 2022 · $65k
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
Sherit Isroel
—
2
Eastern European Jewish Heritage Foundation
Philanthropy
3
Israel Chai Foundation Inc

Provided grants to domestic and foreign organizations for purposes for furthering religious outreach and religious education.

International
4
University of Judaism Foundation
—
5
Friends of Jabad Uruguay Inc

Providing funding for jewish learning, observance and charitable work in uruguay

Religion
6
Friends of Jerusalem

Friends of Jerusalem's mission is to provide assistance to the needs and indigent living in Jerusalem and all of Israel.

Human Services
7
Chabad Lametayel Inc

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

—
8
Shaarei Halacha Inc
Philanthropy
9
Zicron Eliyahu Inc
—
10
Zichron Tzvi Elimelech

Assists thousands of needy individuals, families and multiplecharities in Israel and North America.

—
11
Ccf New York Jewish French Community Center of Ny Inc

To further French Jewish Culture, help integration of American in France and French in USA concerning Jewish Culture

Religion
12
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc; the most unlike its peers is Hillel the Foundation for Jewish Campus Life. 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, 2017–2026.

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. 10 of the 24 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

EZRAT ISRAEL INC: $3,532,528 · OtherEZRAT ISRAEL INCCHABAD LUBAVITCH OF GREATER FORT LAUDERDALE INC: $400,000 · OtherCHABAD LUBAVITCH OF GREATER FORT LAUDERDALE INC+12 more: $202,886 · OtherTOMCHEI ISRAEL: $175,000 · ReligionBEIT CHABAD ALMAGRO INC: $30,000 · ReligionHILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $25,000 · ReligionAleph Kosher Inc: $25,000 · ReligionFRIENDSHIP CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL INC: $25,000 · ReligionChabad Terror Victims Project Inc: $28,625 · InternationalThe American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc: $17,300 · InternationalFEDERATION OF JEWISH COMMUNITIES OF THE CIS INC: $24,003 · PhilanthropyFRIENDS OF THE JEWISH COMMUNITY OF TUCUMAN: $17,880 · Human ServicesIsrael Next Generation INC: $15,000 · Youth Development
Other$4,135,414Religion$280,000International$45,925Philanthropy$24,003Human Services$17,880Youth Development$15,000

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 budgetTOMCHEI ISRAEL: $175,000 over 1y, 6.1% of budgetBEIT CHABAD ALMAGRO INC: $30,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetChabad Terror Victims Project Inc: $28,625 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetHILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAleph Kosher Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetFRIENDSHIP CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL INC: $25,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetFEDERATION OF JEWISH COMMUNITIES OF THE CIS INC: $24,003 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE JEWISH COMMUNITY OF TUCUMAN: $17,880 over 1y, 5.2% of budgetThe American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc: $17,300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIsrael Next Generation INC: $15,000 over 1y, 1.5% 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 TOMCHEI ISRAEL ↗
  • Who funds BEIT CHABAD ALMAGRO INC ↗
  • Who funds Chabad Terror Victims Project Inc ↗
  • Who funds HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE ↗
  • Who funds Aleph Kosher Inc ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDSHIP CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
  • Who funds FEDERATION OF JEWISH COMMUNITIES OF THE CIS INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE JEWISH COMMUNITY OF TUCUMAN ↗
  • Who funds The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc ↗
  • Who funds Israel Next Generation 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.

Jewish Communal FundNash Charity Foundati…Kolel Torah IncGs Donor Advised Phil…The Ojc FundAmerican Friends of C…Congregation Bh IncMaon Noam IncThe Koum Family Found…United Jewish Appeal-…National Philanthropi…Morgan Stanley Global…
Jewish Communal FundNY25.6× affinity14 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Nash Charity Foundation Inc · Kolel Torah Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Ojc Fund · American Friends of Chasdei Yosef · Congregation Bh Inc · Maon Noam Inc · The Koum Family Foundation · United Jewish Appeal-Federation of Jewish Philanthropies of New York Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust 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 Chabad of Argentina Relief Appeal funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Chabad of Argentina Relief Appeal. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%3%6%10%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 Chabad of Argentina Relief Appeal?

    Find your warmest path to Chabad of Argentina Relief Appeal 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 24 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 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 Chabad of Argentina Relief Appeal’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