Skip to content

· Public charity

Chai Charity Inc

The mission of Chai Charity Inc is to provide practical financial assistance to low income families and individuals livingin the USA and overseas with household expenditures, medical costs, and educational costs

$1.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$100k
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, FY2024 to 2025.

Religion$248kHuman Services$169kEducation$48kFood & Nutrition$28k
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 13 grants below total $486,217, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,484,303 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $998,086 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $11k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $206k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $269k
$23,405
Median grant
6
States reached
$244k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Federation of Jewish Communities$100,000
Chabad of North Hollywood$94,612
Macne Israel$74,760
Miami Jewish Montessori$48,248
White Forest Jewish Community Cente$39,245
Talmudic Academy of Baltimore$29,320
Tilson Family Irrevocable Grantor$23,405
Reicher Family$21,000
Machon Beth Meir$19,700
Congregation Midrash Shmuel$12,635
Ohr Somayach International$12,050
PEF Israel The Jerusalem Foundati$6,242
Chabad of the Woodlands$5,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY24–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 87% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Chabad of North Hollywood: $95k → 14%Machon Beth Meir: $20k → 6%Tilson Family Irrevocable Grantor: $23k → 14%Federation of Jewish Communities: $100k → 17%Macne Israel: $75k → 20%Chabad of the Woodlands: $5k → 9%Reicher Family: $21k → 13%Miami Jewish Montessori: $48k → 15%Ohr Somayach International: $12k → 11%Talmudic Academy of Baltimore: $29k → 11%PEF Israel The Jerusalem Foundati: $6k → 17%White Forest Jewish Community Cente: $39k → 20%Matza Bakery: $7k → 20%Congregation Midrash Shmuel: $13k → 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: $759k 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.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$759k · 100% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: Fire Rebuild Synagouge · Rebuild Synagouge

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 field
04the grantee network

3 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. 3 of the 14 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)
3/3
Grantees still filing
1/3
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Federation of Jewish Communities: $100,000 · OtherFederation of Jewish CommunitiesCHABAD OF NORTH HOLLYWOOD: $94,612 · OtherCHABAD OF NORTH HOLLYWOODMACHNE ISRAEL INC: $74,760 · OtherMACHNE ISRAEL INCWhite Forest Jewish Community Cente: $39,245 · OtherWhite Forest Jewish Community CenteTALMUDICAL ACADEMY OF BALTIMORE INC: $29,320 · OtherTALMUDICAL ACADEMY OF BALTIMORE INCTilson Family Irrevocable Grantor: $23,405 · OtherTilson Family Irrevocable GrantorReicher Family: $21,000 · Other+5 more: $42,827 · Other+5 moreMIAMI JEWISH MONTESSORI INC: $48,248 · EducationMIAMI JEWIS…MACHON BETH MEIR: $19,700 · Philanthropy
Other$425,169Education$48,248Philanthropy$19,700

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

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their 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 MIAMI JEWISH MONTESSORI INC ↗
  • Who funds MACHON BETH MEIR ↗
  • Who funds OHR SOMAYACH INTERNATIONAL 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 FundNY15.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Chai Charity Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Chai Charity Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 10%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
    1get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Chai Charity Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Chai Charity 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 14 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Chai Charity’s filings →

    More from the funding graph