Skip to content
Charles & Esther Tebele Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Charles & Esther Tebele Foundation Inc

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.

$26k
Granted FY2025still arriving
18
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$21k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0177% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$164kInternational$6kHealth$5kHuman Services$4kPhilanthropy$3kEducation$3kYouth Development$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k17 grants · $5k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $21k
$180
Median grant
3
States reached
$3k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SHAARE TEFILAH BENE MOSHE INC$20,720
Individual grant recipient$1,063
HILLEL YESHIVA$1,000
SEPHARDIC BIKUR HOLIM$625
DSN COMMUNITY CENTER$522
NEW YORK CANCER CENTER$395
BRIDGE ACADAMY$180
AHAVAT CHAIM VACHESED$180
Individual grant recipient$180
VARIOUS CHARITY ORGANIZATIONS$130
YAD YOSEF$117
HABAYIT HOME AWAY FROM HOME INC$115
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF KUPAT HAIR INC$104
CHAI LIFELINE$64
YACHAD$53
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 (FY22–25, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 71% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%THE SPECIAL CHILDREN CENTER: $180 → 11%SEPHARDIC BIKUR HOLIM: $625 → 20%BONEI OLAM: $200 → 20%BONEI OLAM: $59 → 20%AHAVAT CHAIM VACHESED: $180 → 6%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$243k · 19 repeat orgs$10k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +19% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

19 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
31

Total granted

$243k
$8k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+19%
0%

Still filing today

37%
42%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthEducationPhilanthropyHuman ServicesInternationalYouth 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

  • TB
    THE BRIDGE ACADEMY INC
    2× · 2017–2025 · $3k · revenue +19%
  • DS
    DEAL SEPHARDIC YOUTH CENTER INC
    5× · 2019–2025 · $2k · revenue +205%
  • NY
    New York Cancer Center Inc
    7× · 2017–2025 · $2k · revenue +273%

Funded once

  • FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES
    one grant, 2024 · $3k · revenue 0%
  • MF
    MORRIS FRANCO CANCER CNETER
    one grant, 2019 · $901
  • AT
    ATERET TORAH CENTER
    one grant, 2019 · $700
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
Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation
Philanthropy
2
Tal Hashamayim Foundation
Religion
3
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
4
The Etz Chaim Charitable Trust
Philanthropy
5
Yad Yosef Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Zichron Chaim Meir Foundation
Philanthropy
7
Tzemach Yifroch Foundation
—
8
Sherit Isroel
—
9
Zichron Moshe Elihu Tzedoka Fund
Philanthropy
10
Zechut Avot Foundation
Philanthropy
11
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
12
Magen Avraham Fund
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rofeh Cholim Cancer Society Inc; the most unlike its peers is Ezra Abraham to Life Foundation. 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

26 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. 26 of the 59 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/26
Grantees still filing
12/26
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SHAARE TEFILAH BEN MOSHE INC: $156,731 · OtherSHAARE TEFILAH BEN MOSHE INCIndividual grant recipient: $21,303 · OtherIndividual grant recipientSEPHARDIC BIKUR HOLIM MA'OZ LA'EBYO: $15,577 · OtherSEPHARDIC BIKUR HOLIM MA'OZ LA'EBYOIndividual grant recipient: $11,003 · OtherHILLEL YESHIVA: $8,666 · Other+32 more: $20,080 · Other+32 moreSEPHARDIC COMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER INC: $4,065 · Youth DevelopmentDEAL SEPHARDIC YOUTH CENTER INC: $2,248 · Youth DevelopmentAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $3,101 · InternationalFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $2,678 · InternationalEZER MIZION: $266 · InternationalTHE BRIDGE ACADEMY INC: $2,780 · EducationYESHIVAT MORESHET YERUSHALAYIM INC: $180 · Education+2 more: $167 · EducationNew York Cancer Center Inc: $1,921 · HealthA GIVING HAND ORG INC: $180 · HealthCHAI LIFELINE INC: $165 · Health+2 more: $66 · HealthSBH COMMUNITY SERVICE NETWORK INC: $625 · Human ServicesBonei Olam Inc: $259 · Human ServicesTHE SPECIAL CHILDREN CENTER: $180 · Human ServicesAHAVAT HAIM VACHESED: $180 · Human ServicesEzra Abraham To Life Foundation: $220 · PhilanthropyROFEH CHOLIM CANCER SOCIETY INC: $101 · PhilanthropyTHE SHELLY COHEN BRIDAL FUND: $100 · PhilanthropyLEV LALEV INC: $55 · Philanthropy
Other$233,360Youth Development$6,313International$6,045Education$3,127Health$2,332Human Services$1,244Philanthropy$476

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSEPHARDIC COMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER INC: $4,065 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $3,101 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE BRIDGE ACADEMY INC: $2,780 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $2,678 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDEAL SEPHARDIC YOUTH CENTER INC: $2,248 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetNew York Cancer Center Inc: $1,921 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetEZER MIZION: $266 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBonei Olam Inc: $259 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEzra Abraham To Life Foundation: $220 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE SPECIAL CHILDREN CENTER: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVAT MORESHET YERUSHALAYIM INC: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetA GIVING HAND ORG INC: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAHAVAT HAIM VACHESED: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $165 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF KUPAT HA'IR: $104 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMABAS FUND INC: $101 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetROFEH CHOLIM CANCER SOCIETY INC: $101 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SHELLY COHEN BRIDAL FUND: $100 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBET YAAKOV OF THE JERSEY SHORE INC: $66 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLEV LALEV INC: $55 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Sabra Institute Inc: $52 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEZRA CORNMAN BAR MITZVAH FOUNDATION: $52 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE ELLIE RUBY FOUNDATION INC: $48 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $18 over 1y, 0.0% 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 SEPHARDIC COMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM ↗
  • Who funds THE BRIDGE ACADEMY INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES ↗
  • Who funds DEAL SEPHARDIC YOUTH CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds New York Cancer Center Inc ↗
  • Who funds SBH COMMUNITY SERVICE NETWORK INC ↗
  • Who funds EZER MIZION ↗
  • Who funds Bonei Olam Inc ↗
  • Who funds Ezra Abraham To Life Foundation ↗
  • Who funds THE SPECIAL CHILDREN CENTER ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVAT MORESHET YERUSHALAYIM INC ↗
  • Who funds A GIVING HAND ORG INC ↗
  • Who funds AHAVAT HAIM VACHESED ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗
  • Who funds HABAYIT HOME AWAY FROM HOME 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 FundThe Howard Hoffman & …The Amin and Lillian …Samuel & Mollie Jemal…Isaac & Marjorie Gind…Jack Adjmi Family Fou…Altoon Sutton Memoria…E R G FoundationRalph J Harary Founda…Morris and Esther Ade…David M Levy Family F…Ic Hessed Foundation
Jewish Communal FundNY31.5× affinity17 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · The Howard Hoffman & Sons Foundation Inc · The Amin and Lillian Adjmi Foundation · Samuel & Mollie Jemal Foundation Co Jem Realty · Isaac & Marjorie Gindi Foundation Inc · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Altoon Sutton Memorial Fund · E R G Foundation · Ralph J Harary Foundation Inc · Morris and Esther Ades Foundation Co Morris Ades - S&A Stores Inc · David M Levy Family Foundation · Ic Hessed 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 Charles & Esther Tebele Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Charles & Esther Tebele Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 60%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 9%
  • Bet Yaakov of the Jersey Shore Inc: 9% of income from government
  • The Special Children Center: 5% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
6get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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 Charles & Esther Tebele Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Charles & Esther Tebele Foundation 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 59 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-PF 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 Charles & Esther Tebele’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