Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Chester 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.

$311k
Granted FY2022
16
Grants FY2022
2
States reached
$285k
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

99% of Chester Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2022, the last year Chester Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $311k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

0
20
6
21
6
22
5
23
0
24
0
25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What you fund
0175% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202025.

Philanthropy$1.2MReligion$519kEducation$1kRecreation & Sports$500Arts & Culture$202Community Improvement$5Other$0
02FY2022 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2022

  • Under $10k14 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $250k+1 grant · $285k
$500
Median grant
2
States reached
$10M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MOSDOS BETH JOSEPH TZVI$285,000
AMIDEI ZION OF BOBOV$10,000
CONGREGATION ATZEI CHAIM SIGET$5,845
GEMACH PINAS YIKRAS$3,475
YESHIVA IMREI YOSEF$1,800
Individual grant recipient$1,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
CHESED OF WEST PALM BEACH$500
KOLEL SATAMAR OF BORO PARK$500
KOLEL AVREICHEM OF UTA$500
Individual grant recipient$400
SIFREI ALGAZI - CHASUDIM TOVIM$200
AHAVAS CHESED$180
INT'L COMMETTEE FOR THE PRESERVATION OF HAR HAZEITZEM$101
Individual grant recipient$101
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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 40% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%CONGREGATION YEREIM: $400 → 20%CHESED OF WEST PALM BEACH: $500 → 11%TSCHI: $101 → 13%FIDELITY CHARITABLE: $415k → 11%CONGREGATION YEREIM: $400 → 20%CHESED OF WEST PALM BEACH: $360 → 11%FIDELITY CHARITABLE: $350k → 11%RCCS: $360 → 20%CHESED OF WEST PALM BEACH: $180 → 11%FIDELITY CHARITABLE: $321k → 11%SIFREI ALGAZI - CHASUDIM TOVIM: $200 → 20%MOSDOS BETH JOSEPH TZVI: $285k → 20%YESHIVA SHAREY LIMUD: $50k → 20%MOSDOS BETH JOSEPH TZVI: $13k → 20%MOSDOS BETH JOSEPH TZVI: $5k → 20%MOSDOS BETH JOSEPH TZVI: $5k → 20%KOLEL SHOMREI HACHOMOS: $1k → 20%SATMAR BIKUR CHOLIM: $1k → 20%KOLEL YETEV LEV: $1k → 20%SATMAR BIKUR CHOLIM: $1k → 20%KOLEL AVREICHEM OF UTA: $500 → 20%KOLEL AVREICHEM OF UTA: $500 → 20%AHAVAS CHESED: $180 → 20%CONGREGATION BETH OSHER: $101 → 20%GEMACH PINAS YIKRAS: $102k → 20%THE OJC FUND: $35k → 20%CONGREGATION ATZEI CHAIM SIGET: $28k → 20%THE OJC FUND: $25k → 20%THE OJC FUND: $19k → 20%AMIDEI ZION OF BOBOV: $10k → 20%CONGREGATION ATZEI CHAIM SIGET: $6k → 20%GEMACH PINAS YIKRAS: $3k → 20%CONGREGATION YETEV LEV: $2k → 20%CONGREGATION ATZEI CHAIM SIGET: $2k → 20%YESHIVA IMREI YOSEF: $2k → 20%YESHIVA IMREI YOSEF: $2k → 20%KOLEL OHEL YISOCHOR: $1k → 20%KOLEL OHEL YISOCHOR: $1k → 20%KOLEL YETEV LEV: $1k → 20%ZICHRON SHLOMO REFUAH FUND: $500 → 20%ZICHRON SHOLOMO REFUAH FUNS: $500 → 20%KOLEL SATAMAR OF BORO PARK: $500 → 20%YESHIVA YESODA HATORAH: $300 → 20%CONGREGATION EZRAZ SHULEM: $250 → 20%CONTRIBUTION ARE VOLUMINOUS DETAILS AVAILABLE AT FOUNDATION: $114k → 20%YESHIVA CHASAN SOFER: $250 → 20%CHINA V'CHISDA: $1k → 20%TORAH TEMIMAH TALMUDICAL ACDEMY: $500 → 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.

72%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$466k · 13 repeat orgs$179k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2022, 1 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call). Read against FY2022, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
10

Total granted

$466k
$167k

Still filing today

8%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

  • MB
    MOSDOS BETH JOSEPH TZVI
    4× · 2021–2025 · $308k
  • GP
    GEMACH PINAS YIKRAS
    2× · 2021–2022 · $105k
  • CA
    CONGREGATION ATZEI CHAIM SIGET
    3× · 2021–2023 · $36k

Funded once

  • CA
    CONTRIBUTION ARE VOLUMINOUS DETAILS AVAILABLE AT FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $114k
  • YS
    YESHIVA SHAREY LIMUD
    one grant, 2021 · $50k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $1k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
04the grantee network

3 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. 3 of the 35 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
3/3
Grantees still filing
2/3
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND — $1,086,100 · Community ImprovementFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUNDMOSDOS BETH JOSEPH TZVI — $307,900 · OtherMOSDOS BETH JOSEPH TZVICONTRIBUTION ARE VOLUMINOUS DETAILS AVAILABLE AT FOUNDATION — $114,083 · OtherCONTRIBUTION ARE VOLUMINOUS DETAILS AVAI…GEMACH PINAS YIKRAS — $105,425 · OtherGEMACH PINAS YIKRASYESHIVA SHAREY LIMUD — $50,000 · OtherYESHIVA SHAREY LIMUDCONGREGATION ATZEI CHAIM SIGET — $36,158 · OtherCONGREGATION ATZEI CHAIM SIGET+27 more — $30,834 · OtherTHE OJC FUND — $79,000 · EducationINTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR THE PRESERVATION OF HAR HAZEITIM INC — $202 · Arts & Culture
Community Improvement$1,086,100Other$644,400Education$79,000Arts & Culture$202

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND — $1,086,100 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE OJC FUND — $79,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR THE PRESERVATION OF HAR HAZEITIM INC — $202 over 2y, 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 FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND
  • Who funds THE OJC FUND
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR THE PRESERVATION OF HAR HAZEITIM 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 FundNY21.4× affinity9 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · R' Shaya Ben Moshe Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Chester 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 · 10%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Chester Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Chester Foundation 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 35 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph