Loading…
· Private foundation
Chaim Charitable Foundation Trust
This foundation does not accept unsolicited requests — it funds preselected organizations.
$146k
Granted FY2024
45
Grants
2
Communities
$24k
Largest
01What you fund
01
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 89% of Chaim Charitable Foundation Trust’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2018
synagouge maintreligious stupay poorpay camp
2019
synagouge maintreligious stupay poor
2020
synagouge maintreligious stupay poorpoor widows
2021
synagouge maintorphans attendattend religiousreligious stu
2022
religious stu
2023
building postsynagouge maintanacereligious students
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2024 · 45 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k39 grants · $50k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $95k
$1,100
Median grant
2
States reached
$321k
Total assets
Largest grants
- The OJC Fund$24,000
- Cong Binyan Szerdehely$20,000
- Cong Binyan David$13,500
- Cong Ateres Eliezer'd'Bicsad$13,250
- Cong Beis Eliezer$13,100
- Toras Moshe Institute$11,500
- Cong Yesoda Kol Yehuda$8,150
- Elef Hamugein$3,800
- Cong Tiferes Yaakov$3,600
- Cong Arad$3,000
- Cong Noam Elimelech Lizensk$2,890
- Satmar Bikur Cholim$2,890
- Cong Rav Chesed$2,510
- Cong Yetev Lev$2,160
- Cong Ezer Yeshiva$1,980
02The need
04
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:
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $9k) land where the poverty rate runs at 24% — the area typically sits at 15%. 81% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — 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.
88%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.5M · 71 repeat orgs$212k to everyone else
71 repeat relationships — 28 still active in FY2024, 43 since wound down; 17 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
71
47
Total granted
$1.5M
$199k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+44%
+224%
Still filing today
6%
6%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
Human ServicesReligionEducationPublic Safety & DisasterOther
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
- TOThe OJC Fund7× · 2017–2024 · $171k · revenue +642%
- TATzidkas Avraham Inc4× · 2020–2023 · $7k · revenue +18%
- CRCong Rav Lehoshia Inc2× · 2023–2024 · $3k · revenue +5242%
Funded once
- CACong Ahavas Tzdokah V'Chesed Incone grant, 2022 · $30k
- YLYAD LACHMU ANYU LENITZRUCHIM CHOK Lone grant, 2017 · $25k
- CRCONG RACHMASTRIVKAone grant, 2020 · $25k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
04Your field
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
1
Ohr Olam Corp
Publish religious books
Religion
2
Kol Yehuda Inc
To disseminate the torah, orthodox jewish laws and customs.
Philanthropy
3
Ohr Yisrael Yeshiva Inc
Ohr Yisrael is a religious institution that provides religious services and instruction to Rabbis and community members.
Religion
4
Zera Koidesh Inc
To award financial grants to religios orthodox jewish organizations and to help by financial means, the needy, sick and disabled people.
—
5
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
6
Olam Hatzedaka Corp
Provides financial assistance to needy families on a global level which meet the specified qualifications required by organization's bylaws.
Religion
7
Bonei Olam Division of Rockland County
Bonei Olam provides financial assistance,guidance & referrals for assisted reproductive technology,including consultations, work up, medications, high risk pregnancy,Preimplantation genetic diagnosis,pre & post…
International
8
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
9
Bonei Olam Division of Central Jersey
Bonei Olam provides financial assistance,guidance & referrals for assisted reproductive technology,including consultations, work up, medications, high risk pregnancy,Preimplantation genetic diagnosis,pre & post…
International
10
Ohr Yosef Inc
To help disadvantaged children, widows and orphans by providing food, clothing, supplies and grants to charitable tax exempt organizations.
Philanthropy
11
Shaarei Halacha Inc
Philanthropy
12
Tzohar Israel Foundation
The mission of theTzohar Israel Foundationis to assist its affiliate, Tzohar, located in Israel, to provide an array of Jewish lifecycle programs and services for Jewish people in Israel.Such programs include, assistance with Jewish…
Religion
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Oorah Inc and the most unlike its peers is Renewal of Life Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 25 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 10% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.
Closures · last 5 years
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 9% of the field you don’t fund.
orgs you fund
0.0%0/40
the rest of the field
9%
1,716/18,106
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
05the grantee network
9 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/9
Grantees still filing
8/9
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Other$1,549,829Education$171,000Human Services$9,340Religion$5,960Public Safety & Disaster$3,600
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
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 FundNY50.7× affinity27 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Kanfei Yoneh Foundation · American Friends of Bnai Levy · The Lexicon Foundation Inc · R' Shaya Ben Moshe Foundation · Blum Foundation · Yr Foundation · I&S Foundation · Greenzweig Family Foundation · Chaim Maleh Foundation · Zelig and Rifky Weiss Family · Strulovich Family Foundation Trust
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 organisation Chaim Charitable Foundation Trust 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
2024
’20’21’22’23’24
- Oorah Inc — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: Tzidkas Avraham Inc.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
high risk
~0 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
8 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 465329831 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on Tzidkas Avraham Inc, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- FlagFinancial stability— Roughly 0 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2025; revenue grew over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 0% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Chaim Charitable Foundation Trust?
Find your warmest path to Chaim Charitable Foundation Trust through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines