· Private foundation
David & Esther Muschel 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k45 grants · $52k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $18k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CONGREGATION AHAVATH TORAH | $17,743 |
| BOCA JEWISH CENTER | $5,581 |
| CAMP MOSHAVA | $3,642 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,995 |
| RAMAZ SCHOOL | $2,500 |
| UJA Federation of NY Israel Emergency Day After Fu | $2,500 |
| HEBREW CHARTER SCHOOLS | $2,500 |
| Iyun Haparsha | $2,360 |
| AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVAT ERETZ HATZVI | $2,276 |
| OUR PLACE | $2,018 |
| PROJECT EXTREME | $2,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,000 |
| CONGREGATION BNAI YESH NAIYESHURUN | $2,000 |
| YAD ELIEZER | $1,800 |
| FRIENDS OF BET SABAH ELAZRAKI | $1,500 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY18–23, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 90% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +41% since the first grant, against +18% for the ones you funded once.
77 repeat relationships — 22 still active in FY2024, 55 since wound down; 23 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $21k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- SISharsheret Inc8× · 2017–2024 · $78k · revenue +187%
- FOFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC7× · 2018–2024 · $51k · revenue +274%
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM3× · 2020–2024 · $18k · revenue +198%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $10k
- UWUNITED WAY OF BERGEN COUNTYone grant, 2019 · $4k · revenue -6%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2017 · $4k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
To further jewish education in israel
To promote, benefit, and support Jewish religious, charitable & educational activities in Israel and the USA.
Furtherance of jewish education
To support religious, charitable, scientific, literary and/or educational programs
Raise funds for religious and educational institutions in the state of israel, and to provide educational and social improvement for the children of kiryat arba, israel.
To voluntarily assist the house of religious learning known as yeshiva neveh zion in israel
To provide support to jewish religious education in israel and around the world, and provide financial assistance to and on behalf of yeshivah beth israel tifereth menachem.
To promote, assist, and sponsor the spreading of Jewish religious education in Israel. The organization will also organize inspirational gatherings in the USA to enhance the participants' Torah knowledge.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Emunah of America Inc and the most unlike its peers is Camp Extreme D/B/a Project Extreme. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 31 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
70 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 70 of the 226 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 Sharsheret Inc ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM ↗
- Who funds BL GIRLS TOWN JERUSALEM INC ↗
- Who funds IYUN HAPARSHA INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC ↗
- Who funds BRIS AVROHOM INC ↗
- Who funds American Friends of Migdal OHR ↗
- Who funds EMUNAH OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds YAD YISROEL ↗
- Who funds MORIAH SCHOOL OF ENGLEWOOD ↗
- Who funds Project Ezrah Needs Inc ↗
- Who funds Yeshivat Ashreinu Inc ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF BERGEN COUNTY ↗
- Who funds Rav Moshe Feinstein Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds Central Fund of Israel ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Fjc · Cross River Community Foundation · The Blumenfeld Family Foundation · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · The Daniel E and Joyce G Straus Family Foundation · M D Katz Foundation Inc · Jewish Federation of Northern New Jersey Inc · The Alan and Elisa Pines Family Foundation Inc · The Arthur & Joyce Fein Family Foundation · The Ojc Fund · Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore
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 David & Esther Muschel 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Hias Inc — 88% of income from government
- Sharsheret Inc — 4% of income from government
- One Family Inc — 1% of income from government
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.