Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Chaim and Dvora Ostreicher Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$708k
Granted FY2025still arriving
16
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$325k
Largest
01What you fund
0185% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202025.

Religion$2.8MHealth$60kHuman Services$60kOther$0
02FY2025 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $123k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $246k
  • $250k+1 grant · $325k
$15,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$70k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BET-EL YESHIVA CENTER$325,000
CONG OHR SHRAGA VERETZKY$136,000
YOUNG ISRAEL OF HILLCREST$60,000
YESHIVA CHAIM V'SHOLOM$50,000
Individual grant recipient$25,000
BEIS FRIMA CHINUCH CENTER$18,000
MOSDOS MUNKACS$15,000
YODEI BINAH$15,000
YESHIVA NER SHLOMO$10,000
OHEL CHILDREN'S HOME$10,000
TALMUD TORAH TIFERES BUNIM$10,000
CHEVRA MEZONOS JERUSALEM$10,000
CHAI LIFELINE$10,000
GESHER$5,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
02The need
03

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 52% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BET-EL YESHIVA CENTER: $325k → 6%YOUNG ISRAEL OF HILLCREST: $80k → 13%YESHIVA DARKEI EMUNAH: $18k → 14%CHABAD ON CAMPUS: $15k → 20%CONGREGATION DARCHEI TZEDEK: $25k → 11%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BET-EL YESHIVA CENTER: $250k → 6%YOUNG ISRAEL OF HILLCREST: $70k → 13%PRI LETOIVA INSTITUTE: $15k → 14%UNITED TALMUDICAL ACADEMY: $25k → 20%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BET-EL YESHIVA CENTER: $236k → 6%YOUNG ISRAEL OF HILLCREST: $60k → 13%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BET-EL YESHIVA CENTER: $200k → 6%YOUNG ISRAEL OF HILLCREST: $60k → 13%YESHIVA CHAIM V'SHOLOM: $75k → 20%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BET-EL YESHIVA CENTER: $150k → 6%YOUNG ISRAEL OF HILLCREST: $20k → 13%YESHIVA CHAIM V'SHOLOM: $61k → 20%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BET-EL YESHIVA CENTER: $100k → 6%YESHIVA CHAIM V'SHOLOM: $52k → 20%YESHIVA CHAIM V'SHOLOM: $50k → 20%YESHIVA SHOR YOSHUV: $25k → 6%MOSDOS MUNKACS: $43k → 20%YESHIVA SHOR YOSHUV: $25k → 6%YESHIVA CHAIM V'SHOLOM: $36k → 20%YESHIVA SHOR YOSHUV: $25k → 6%YESHIVA CHAIM V'SHOLOM: $36k → 20%YESHIVA SHOR YOSHUV: $25k → 6%MOSDOS MUNKACS: $25k → 20%YESHIVA SHOR YOSHUV: $25k → 6%BEIS FRIMA CHINUCH CENTER: $25k → 20%YESHIVA SHOR YOSHUV: $25k → 6%TALMUD TORAH TIFERES BUNIM: $20k → 20%BEIS FRIMA CHINUCH CENTER: $18k → 20%BEIS FRIMA CHINUCH CENTER: $18k → 20%BEIS FRIMA CHINUCH CENTER: $18k → 20%BEIS FRIMA CHINUCH CENTER: $18k → 20%YODEI BINAH: $15k → 20%MOSDOS MUNKACS: $15k → 20%MOSDOS MUNKACS: $15k → 20%MOSDOS MUNKACS: $15k → 20%CONG OHR SHRAGA VERETZKY: $136k → 20%CONG OHR SHRAGA VERETZKY: $36k → 20%CONG OHR SHRAGA VERETZKY: $36k → 20%CONG OHR SHRAGA VERETZKY: $36k → 20%CONG OHR SHRAGA VERETZKY: $36k → 20%CONG OHR SHRAGA VERETZKY: $36k → 20%OHEL CHILDREN'S HOME: $20k → 20%CONG YETEV LEV: $25k → 20%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge
repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$3.0M · 18 repeat orgs$153k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +132% since the first grant, against +86% for the ones you funded once.

18 repeat relationships — 16 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
11

Total granted

$3.0M
$153k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+132%
+86%

Still filing today

11%
9%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationHealthReligionOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BET EL YESHIVA
    6× · 2020–2025 · $1.3M · revenue +132%
  • CO
    CONG OHR SHRAGA VERETZKY
    6× · 2020–2025 · $316k
  • YC
    YESHIVA CHAIM V SHULOM
    6× · 2020–2025 · $310k

Funded once

  • UT
    UNITED TALMUDICAL ACADEMY
    one grant, 2024 · $25k
  • CY
    CONG YETEV LEV
    one grant, 2024 · $25k
  • CD
    CONGREGATION DARCHEI TZEDEK INC
    one grant, 2021 · $25k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
04the grantee network

3 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 3 of the 29 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
3/3
Grantees still filing
3/3
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

CONG OHR SHRAGA VERETZKY — $316,000 · OtherCONG OHR SHRAGA VERETZKYYESHIVA CHAIM V SHULOM — $309,800 · OtherYESHIVA CHAIM V SHULOMYOUNG ISRAEL OF HILLCREST — $300,000 · OtherYOUNG ISRAEL OF HILLCRESTIndividual grant recipient — $150,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMOSDOS MUNKACS — $123,000 · OtherMOSDOS MUNKACSBEIS FRIMA CHINUCH CENTER — $97,000 · OtherBEIS FRIMA CHINUCH CENTERTALMUD TORAH TIFERES BUNIM — $70,000 · Other+19 more — $445,700 · Other+19 moreAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BET EL YESHIVA — $1,261,000 · EducationAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BET EL YESHIVACHAI LIFELINE INC — $60,000 · HealthMISHKAN HATORAH INC — $5,000 · Religion
Other$1,811,500Education$1,261,000Health$60,000Religion$5,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BET EL YESHIVA — $1,261,000 over 6y, 14% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC — $60,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetMISHKAN HATORAH INC — $5,000 over 1y, 4.8% of budget
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BET EL YESHIVA
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC
  • Who funds MISHKAN HATORAH INC

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Ojc FundNY17.3× affinity7 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Chaim and Dvora Ostreicher Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
2021222324
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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, FY2024

    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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Chaim and Dvora Ostreicher Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Chaim and Dvora Ostreicher 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 29 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph