Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Chasdei Zahavi Foundation

$40k
Granted FY2023
24
Grants FY2023
5
States reached
$14k
Largest
01What you fund
0195% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172023.

Religion$431kEducation$7kHuman Services$2kRecreation & Sports$2kHealth$2kYouth Development$1kArts & Culture$1kPhilanthropy$180Other$0
02FY2023 · 24 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k23 grants · $26k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $14k
$600
Median grant
5
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHABAD LUBAVITCH$13,790
Individual grant recipient$7,080
Individual grant recipient$4,350
JEWISH EDUCATIONAL MEDIA - JEM$2,500
CAMP GAN ISRAEL$1,450
BETH RIVKAH SCHOOLS$1,360
Individual grant recipient$1,360
MENACHEM EDUCATION FOUNDATION$1,036
BONEI OLAM$1,000
Individual grant recipient$946
SINAI SCHOOLS$721
TZIVOS HASHEM$600
MEANINGFUL LIFE CENTER$540
JCM$540
COLEL CHABAD$414
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:

Your human-services grants (FY23–23, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%BONEI OLAM: $1k → 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.

38%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$43k · 8 repeat orgs$70k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +151% since the first grant, against +46% for the ones you funded once.

8 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2023, 5 since wound down; 21 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
39

Total granted

$43k
$46k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+151%
+46%

Still filing today

25%
5%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 41% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $24k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’21’22’23
ReligionEducationArts & CultureHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther

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

  • CL
    CHABAD LUBAVITCH
    2× · 2022–2023 · $18k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    3× · 2018–2022 · $10k
  • CO
    CHABAD OF THE HAMPTONS
    2× · 2021–2022 · $4k

Funded once

  • CB
    CONGREGATION BAIS SHIMON
    one grant, 2018 · $6k
  • ML
    MERKOS LINYONEI CHINUCH CHABAD LUBAVITCH OF GEORGIA INC
    one grant, 2018 · $5k
  • CI
    Chayenu Incgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $4k · revenue +46%

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
Gan Israel Chabad Inc

Operation of summer day camp and overnight camp which combines activities with a Torah education

Recreation & Sports
2
Cheder Menachem Inc

Education

Education
3
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
4
Chevrah Lomdei Mishnah Inc

Promoting study of Mishnah and other Jewish texts

Religion
5
Gemilas Chesed Kramer Inc
Philanthropy
6
Bais Menachem Yeshiva Day School

Operation of a religious elementary school with aproximately 50 children enrolled

Education
7
Beis Hachinuch Inc

To provide hebrew religious and secular education for elementary children in a warm and nurturing environment

Education
8
Chabad Jewish Center

The Organization operates an religious outreach center to promote and understand Judaism and the laws of Kosher.

Human Services
9
Ganeinu

Preschool providing jewish and general education studies

Education
10
Cheder Yaldei Menachem Inc

To enrich the youth in the educational understandings of the jewish traditions and religion.

Religion
11
Cheder Chabad of Monsey

To provide high quality jewish religious and secular education

Education
12
Camp Mechaya Inc

The organization was created to promote Jewish study, provide Jewish education & strengthen religion in the Jewish community. The two main programs that are currently running are a summer sleepaway camp for teenage boys and a Talmudic…

Youth Development

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Menachem Education Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Gan Academy. 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

8 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. 8 of the 68 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

CHABAD LUBAVITCH — $18,120 · OtherCHABAD LUBAVITCHIndividual grant recipient — $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient — $7,080 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCONGREGATION BAIS SHIMON — $6,250 · OtherCONGREGATION BAIS SHIMONMERKOS LINYONEI CHINUCH CHABAD LUBAVITCH OF GEORGIA INC — $5,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $4,350 · OtherCHABAD OF THE HAMPTONS — $4,220 · OtherBETH RIVKA SCHOOLS — $3,750 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $3,610 · OtherChabad of East Hampton — $3,430 · Other+51 more — $36,055 · Other+51 moreChayenu Inc — $4,400 · ReligionCAMP HASC INC — $1,540 · ReligionMENACHEM EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC — $2,216 · EducationGan Academy — $371 · EducationJEWISH CHILDRENS MUSEUM — $1,000 · Arts & CultureBonei Olam Inc — $1,000 · Human ServicesCROWN HEIGHTS CHEVRA SIMCHAS SHABBOS V'YOM TOV INC — $180 · Philanthropy
Other$101,865Religion$5,940Education$2,587Arts & Culture$1,000Human Services$1,000Philanthropy$180

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 budgetChayenu Inc — $4,400 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMENACHEM EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC — $2,216 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCAMP HASC INC — $1,540 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCAMP GAN ISRAEL INC — $1,450 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetJEWISH CHILDRENS MUSEUM — $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBonei Olam Inc — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGan Academy — $371 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCROWN HEIGHTS CHEVRA SIMCHAS SHABBOS V'YOM TOV INC — $180 over 1y, 0.0% 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 Chayenu Inc
  • Who funds MENACHEM EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds CAMP HASC INC
  • Who funds CAMP GAN ISRAEL INC
  • Who funds JEWISH CHILDRENS MUSEUM
  • Who funds Bonei Olam 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 FundNY19× affinity8 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · Lavie Shterna Popack Family Foundat · National Committee for Furtherance of Jewish Education and Affilliates · Krinsky Foundation Inc · Bracha Vehatzlacha Foundation Inc · Nash Charity Foundation Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Chasdei Zahavi 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    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 68 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record but names no grant recipient in the published copy, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph