Skip to content
Chai Corp at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Chai Corp

To provide support to qualified charities for religious, charitable, scientific, literary and/or educational purposes.

$548k
Granted FY2024still arriving
23
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$63k
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.

Religion$1.4MHuman Services$140kInternational$58kYouth Development$28kScience & Tech$27kHealth$15kPhilanthropy$10kEducation$7kOther$0
02FY2024 · 23 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 23 grants below total $412,204, the rows itemized in this filing. The $548,009 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $135,805 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 $10k5 grants · $36k
  • $10k–50k17 grants · $313k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $63k
$12,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$662k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CONG TORAH UTFILLA$62,803
YESHIVA DARCHEI TORAH$48,250
Chasdei Lev$30,750
TAG$28,875
Ashar$26,163
Cong Binyan Yerushalayim$25,000
BAIS YAAKOV CHOFETZ CHAIM$19,175
AHAVAS BAIS YAAKOV$16,580
Ksav Sofer Research Institute$15,000
Kehillas Ahavas Yisroel$15,000
American Friends of Kollel Shaarei Simcha$13,000
KOLLEL TORAS MISHPAT$12,000
MERCAZ HACHINUCH OF MONSEY$11,900
CONG OTZAR DAAT$11,000
YESHIVA OHR REUVAN$10,180
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, $125k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 86% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%DAVIS MEMORIAL FUND: $12k → 6%ACHIEZER: $5k → 6%TAG: $29k → 11%TAG: $20k → 11%TAG: $14k → 11%TAG: $11k → 11%AF OF MAGEN LACHOLEH: $10k → 11%TAG: $19k → 20%TAG: $5k → 11%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.

64%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.0M · 17 repeat orgs$584k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +188% since the first grant, against +54% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 12 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
32

Total granted

$1.0M
$426k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+188%
+54%

Still filing today

18%
41%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 60% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $158k 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
Human ServicesPhilanthropyInternationalEducationReligionHealthOther
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

  • CT
    CONG TORAH UTFILLA
    3× · 2021–2024 · $245k
  • CD
    CONGREGATION DARCHEI TORAH
    6× · 2017–2024 · $210k
  • CH
    CHUT HAMESHULASH INC DBA FALLSBURG COMMUNITY MIKVEH
    4× · 2017–2020 · $104k · revenue -70%

Funded once

  • MO
    MORASHA OLAMI INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue +123%
  • CN
    CONGREGATION NOAM E LIZENSK
    one grant, 2022 · $50k
  • YS
    YESHIVA SHAAREI TORAH
    2× · 2019–2020 · $35k
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
American Friends of Oseh Chayil

To further jewish education in israel

Religion
2
American Friends of Amaleh Shel Torah Inc

None

Education
3
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
4
American Friends of Amshinover Yeshiva Jerusalem Inc

Support of religious schools in Israel

International
5
American Friends of Shviti Hashem Inc

To support and promote the study of torah (bible) among members of jewish faith worldwide.

Religion
6
American Friends of Yeshivat Hakotel Inc

To support religious, charitable, scientific, literary and/or educational programs

Education
7
Ohr Avrohom and Moshe Inc

We support religious organizations in the us and israel by providing grants.

Public Benefit
8
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
9
Friends of Yeshiva Beer Abraham

Furtherance of jewish education

Religion
10
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
11
American Friends of Mosdot Meir of Israel Inc

To support jewish religious education

Philanthropy
12
American Friends of Tiferet Moshe Betzalel Inc

To foster promote and advance theological torah study, charity, and practice of orthodox judaism worldwide

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Agudath Israel of America; the most unlike its peers is Lakewood Cheder School 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

22 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. 22 of the 64 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)
20/22
Grantees still filing
17/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONG TORAH UTFILLA: $245,003 · OtherCONG TORAH UTFILLACONGREGATION DARCHEI TORAH: $210,400 · OtherCONGREGATION DARCHEI TORAHYRSRH OF MONSEY INC: $51,980 · OtherCONGREGATION NOAM E LIZENSK: $50,000 · OtherAGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA: $50,000 · Other+41 more: $650,623 · Other+41 moreTECHNOLOGY AWARENESS GROUP: $78,725 · Human ServicesTAG FLATBUSH INC: $18,875 · Human ServicesDAVIS MEMORIAL FUND INC: $12,000 · Human ServicesAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN LACHOLEH INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesACHIEZER COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesCHUT HAMESHULASH INC DBA FALLSBURG COMMUNITY MIKVEH: $104,000 · ReligionNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR HEBREW DAY SCHOOLS: $11,900 · ReligionMORASHA OLAMI INC: $50,000 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF KOLEL SHAAREI SIMCHA: $13,000 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVAS TORAS MOSHE: $8,000 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF RCT INC: $46,101 · EducationAMERICAN FRIENDS OF ATERES BNOS YERUSHAL: $7,500 · EducationLAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC: $7,000 · EducationMORESHET BAT SHEVA - ORCHOT YOSHER: $15,000 · PhilanthropyTOMCHEI TORAH B'ERETZ YISRAEL INC TOMCHEI TORAH B'ERET: $10,000 · PhilanthropyDONORS FUND INC: $10,000 · PhilanthropyEITZ CHAIM FOUNDATION: $7,000 · PhilanthropyHATZOLAH EMERGENCY AIR RESPONSE TEAM INC: $15,000 · Health
Other$1,258,006Human Services$124,600Religion$115,900International$71,000Education$60,601Philanthropy$42,000Health$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 budgetCHUT HAMESHULASH INC DBA FALLSBURG COMMUNITY MIKVEH: $104,000 over 4y, 24% of budgetTECHNOLOGY AWARENESS GROUP: $78,725 over 5y, 2.1% of budgetMORASHA OLAMI INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA: $50,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF RCT INC: $46,101 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetMACHANAYIM INC: $19,000 over 4y, 3.4% of budgetTAG FLATBUSH INC: $18,875 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetHATZOLAH EMERGENCY AIR RESPONSE TEAM INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCONG CHASDEI MOSHE INC: $15,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetMORESHET BAT SHEVA - ORCHOT YOSHER: $15,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF KOLEL SHAAREI SIMCHA: $13,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetDAVIS MEMORIAL FUND INC: $12,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTOMCHEI TORAH B'ERETZ YISRAEL INC TOMCHEI TORAH B'ERET: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN LACHOLEH INC: $10,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetDONORS FUND INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAVNEI KODESH INC: $8,700 over 1y, 7.7% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVAS TORAS MOSHE: $8,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF ATERES BNOS YERUSHAL: $7,500 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetLAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC: $7,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetACHIEZER COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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 CHUT HAMESHULASH INC DBA FALLSBURG COMMUNITY MIKVEH ↗
  • Who funds TECHNOLOGY AWARENESS GROUP ↗
  • Who funds MORASHA OLAMI INC ↗
  • Who funds AGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF RCT INC ↗
  • Who funds MACHANAYIM INC ↗
  • Who funds TAG FLATBUSH INC ↗
  • Who funds HATZOLAH EMERGENCY AIR RESPONSE TEAM INC ↗
  • Who funds CONG CHASDEI MOSHE INC ↗
  • Who funds MORESHET BAT SHEVA - ORCHOT YOSHER ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF KOLEL SHAAREI SIMCHA ↗
  • Who funds DAVIS MEMORIAL FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL SOCIETY FOR HEBREW DAY SCHOOLS ↗
  • Who funds TOMCHEI TORAH B'ERETZ YISRAEL INC TOMCHEI TORAH B'ERET ↗

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 FundJewish Communal FundJack Adjmi Family Fou…National Society for …Donors Fund IncFjcJewish Federation of …Jewish Community Foun…Associated Jewish Cha…The Levitin Family Ch…Malchus FoundationThe Fishoff Family Fo…
The Ojc FundNY50.3× affinity36 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · National Society for Hebrew Day Schools · Donors Fund Inc · Fjc · Jewish Federation of Cleveland · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore · The Levitin Family Charitable Trust · Malchus Foundation · The Fishoff Family 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 Corp funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Chai Corp. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 90%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Technology Awareness Group: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
9get 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, 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Chai Corp?

Find your warmest path to Chai Corp 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 64 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 Chai’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