Skip to content

· Private foundation

Chesed Lavraham the Neustadt Family 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.

$32k
Granted FY2025still arriving
24
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$4k
Largest
01What it funds
0158% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2024.

Religion$8kPhilanthropy$360Public Benefit$180Health$50Arts & Culture$36Other$0
02FY2025 · 24 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$900
Median grant
3
States reached
$2k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Mesoras Hatorah$3,930
Mesivta of Long Beach$3,600
Orot Haim Ve Moshe$3,350
Lev L'Achim$2,500
Bais Medrash of Pine Lake Park$2,470
Yeshiva Bais Mikroh$2,400
Individual grant recipient$2,250
Gemach of Jackson$2,180
Ohr Shraga$1,800
Individual grant recipient$1,771
Individual grant recipient$1,600
Tomchei Shabbos of Lakewood$900
BJOC$600
Individual grant recipient$600
Tomchei Shabbos of Rockland$540
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 (FY25–25, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%Gemach of Jackson: $2k → 11%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.

31%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$14k · 6 repeat orgs$30k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 21 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
12

Total granted

$14k
$2k

Still filing today

0%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 15% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $28k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’23’24’25
EducationHuman ServicesReligionOther
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

  • MO
    Mesivta of Long Beach
    2× · 2024–2025 · $7k
  • TS
    Tomchei Shabbos of Lakewood
    2× · 2023–2024 · $3k
  • B
    BJOC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $2k

Funded once

  • MO
    Mesivta of Long Beach Chesed Fund
    one grant, 2023 · $360
  • AO
    Agudah of Highland Park
    one grant, 2023 · $288
  • AO
    Agudah of Edison Highland Park
    one grant, 2024 · $279
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

3 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. 3 of the 39 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
3/3
Grantees still filing
2/3
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Mesivta of Long Beach: $7,200 · OtherMesivta of Long BeachOROT HAIM VE MOSHE: $3,350 · OtherOROT HAIM VE MOSHETomchei Shabbos of Lakewood: $2,680 · OtherTomchei Shabbos of LakewoodLev L'Achim: $2,500 · OtherLev L'AchimBEIS MEDRASH OF PINE LAKE PARK INC: $2,470 · OtherBEIS MEDRASH OF PINE LAKE PARK INCCONGREGATION BETH MIKROH INC: $2,400 · OtherCONGREGATION BETH MIKROH INCIndividual grant recipient: $2,250 · OtherIndividual grant recipientOhr Shraga: $1,800 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $1,771 · OtherBJOC: $1,600 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $1,600 · OtherTomchei Shabbos of Rockland: $1,260 · Other+24 more: $6,035 · Other+24 moreMESORAS HATORAH INC: $3,930 · EducationMESORAS HA…GEMACH OF JACKSON INC: $2,180 · Human ServicesKUPAS YOM TOV INC: $180 · Religion
Other$36,916Education$3,930Human Services$2,180Religion$180

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

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetKUPAS YOM TOV INC: $180 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 MESORAS HATORAH INC ↗
  • Who funds GEMACH OF JACKSON INC ↗
  • Who funds KUPAS YOM TOV INC ↗

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 39 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 Chesed Lavraham the Neustadt Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph