Skip to content
Chesed Ahavah Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Chesed Ahavah Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$8k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$8k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0190% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Philanthropy$76kReligion$13kHealth$2kHuman Services$346Arts & Culture$100Youth Development$36Other$0
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$8,380
Median grant
1
States reached
$1k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CONTRIBUTIONS OF 8380 DETAILS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST$8,380
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 (FY17–17, $246) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%MARION & AARON GURAL JCC: $246 → 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.

6%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$6k · 7 repeat orgs$86k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +797% since the first grant, against +68% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
26

Total granted

$6k
$77k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+797%
+68%

Still filing today

29%
19%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k 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
InternationalPhilanthropyHuman ServicesHealthArts & CultureYouth 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

  • HA
    HEBREW ACADEMY OF THE FIVE TOWNS AND ROCKAWAY
    2× · 2017–2018 · $3k
  • CF
    COMMITTEE FOR THE STRENGTHENING OF TORAH TRUE JEWISH COMMITMENT
    2× · 2017–2018 · $1k
  • OU
    ORTHODOX UNION
    2× · 2017–2018 · $540

Funded once

  • CO
    CONTRIBUTIONS OF 39900 DETAILS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
    one grant, 2019 · $40k
  • CO
    CONTRIBUTIONS OF 9500 DETAILS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
  • CO
    CONTRIBUTIONS OF 8640 DETAILS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
    one grant, 2021 · $9k
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
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 34 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
7/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONTRIBUTIONS OF 39900 DETAILS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST: $39,900 · OtherCONTRIBUTIONS OF 39900 DETAILS AVAILABLE UPON REQUESTCONTRIBUTIONS OF 9500 DETAILS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST: $9,500 · OtherCONTRIBUTIONS OF 9500 DETAILS AVAILABLE UPON REQUESTCONTRIBUTIONS OF 8640 DETAILS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST: $8,640 · OtherCONTRIBUTIONS OF 8640 DETAILS AVAILABLE UPON REQUESTCONTRIBUTIONS OF 8380 DETAILS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST: $8,380 · OtherCONTRIBUTIONS OF 8380 DETAILS AVAILABLE UPON REQUESTLAS OLAS CHABAD JEWISH CENTER INC: $6,300 · OtherLAS OLAS CHABAD JEWISH CENTER INCCONTRIBUTIONS OF 4785 DETAILS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST: $4,785 · OtherCONTRIBUTIONS OF 4785 DETAILS AVAILABLE UPON REQUESTCONTRIBUTIONS OF 3760 DETAILS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST: $3,760 · Other+21 more: $7,321 · Other+21 moreAMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC: $1,800 · InternationalFEED ISRAEL FOUNDATION: $540 · PhilanthropyTHE MARION AND AARON GURAL JCC INC: $246 · Human ServicesFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $100 · Arts & CultureISRAEL CHILDRENS CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $90 · HealthCAMP EXTREME D/B/A PROJECT EXTREME: $36 · Youth Development
Other$88,586International$1,800Philanthropy$540Human Services$246Arts & Culture$100Health$90Youth Development$36

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC: $1,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFEED ISRAEL FOUNDATION: $540 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE MARION AND AARON GURAL JCC INC: $246 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBEER HAGOLAH INSTITUTES INC: $172 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetISRAEL CHILDRENS CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $90 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCAMP EXTREME D/B/A PROJECT EXTREME: $36 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 AMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC ↗
  • Who funds FEED ISRAEL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE MARION AND AARON GURAL JCC INC ↗
  • Who funds BEER HAGOLAH INSTITUTES INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC ↗
  • Who funds ISRAEL CHILDRENS CANCER FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds CAMP EXTREME D/B/A PROJECT EXTREME ↗

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 FundF G FoundationZichron Chaim Charity…The Dweck and Rahmey …The Nathan and Marily…The Ojc FundAml Charitable Founda…The Margules Foundati…The Tzedaka FundHouse of Gross Founda…The Yale Fishman Fami…The Rav-Noy Family Fo…
Jewish Communal FundNY21.5× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · F G Foundation · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · The Dweck and Rahmey Family Foundation · The Nathan and Marilyn Silberman Fdn · The Ojc Fund · Aml Charitable Foundation · The Margules Foundation Inc · The Tzedaka Fund · House of Gross Foundation Inc · The Yale Fishman Family Foundation · The Rav-Noy Family Foundation Inc

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 Chesed Ahavah Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Chesed Ahavah Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%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 · 0–15%
    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.

    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 34 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Chesed Ahavah’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