Skip to content
Egon & Telsi Birnbaum Fdn at a glance

· Private foundation

Egon & Telsi Birnbaum Fdn

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.

$292k
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$88k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0155% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$348kHuman Services$133kEducation$54kOther$0
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $38k
  • $10k–50k10 grants · $166k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $88k
$11,500
Median grant
3
States reached
$18k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MISC (UNDER 5000)$87,538
MESIVTA LEV HATORAH$24,500
Individual grant recipient$24,100
Individual grant recipient$24,000
Individual grant recipient$21,000
Individual grant recipient$15,000
MESIVTA OF LONG BEACH$14,000
Individual grant recipient$12,000
Individual grant recipient$11,500
AM FRIENDS YESH SHEARIS YOSEF ASHER$10,100
YESHIVAS EMEK HATORAH$10,000
SHALOM TORAH CENTERS$8,000
YESHIVA OHR HATORAH$8,000
YESHIVA SHAAREI ORAH$7,000
Individual grant recipient$5,366
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.

US giving: 85% of grant dollars ($1.3M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 15% that went abroad ($235k) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 91% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%MESIVTA OF LONG BEACH: $14k → 6%CONG KOL JUDAH: $18k → 14%MISC (UNDER 5000): $88k → 15%BETH ISRAEL CEMETERY: $50k → 8%RABBI SHIMON SCHICK: $60k → 11%MESIVTA OF LONG BEACH: $12k → 6%CONG KOL JUDAH: $18k → 14%YESHIVA TORAS AARON: $21k → 20%MISC (UNDER 5000): $53k → 15%YESHIVA GEDOLAH CLIFFWOOD: $13k → 6%KESSER KAVOD: $81k → 11%JEFFREY EISENBERG: $12k → 13%CONG KOL JUDAH: $18k → 14%YESHIVA TORAS AARON: $21k → 20%MISC (UNDER 5000): $41k → 15%MESIVTA LEV HATORAH: $25k → 11%CONG KOL JUDAH: $18k → 14%YESHIVA TORAS AARON: $19k → 20%MISC (UNDER 5000): $39k → 15%ESTHER WOLF: $24k → 11%CONG KOL JUDAH: $17k → 14%YESHIVA TORAS AARON: $17k → 20%MISC (UNDER 1000): $27k → 15%EMEK HATORAH: $22k → 11%CONG MERCAZ HATORAH OF BELLE HARB: $13k → 13%CONG KOL JUDAH: $17k → 14%YESHIVA TORAS AARON: $16k → 20%MISC (UNDER 1000): $24k → 15%EMEK HATORAH: $18k → 11%CONG KOL JUDAH: $16k → 14%YESHIVA TORAS AARON: $15k → 20%MISC (UNDER 1000): $21k → 15%EMEK HATORAH: $18k → 11%CONG KOL JUDAH: $16k → 14%YESHIVA TORAS AARON: $15k → 20%MISC (UNDER 1000): $18k → 15%CONG OROS BETH YAAKOV: $18k → 11%CONG KOL JUDAH: $15k → 14%YESHIVA TORAS AARON: $15k → 20%MISC (UNDER 1000): $15k → 15%YESHIVA TORAS CHESED: $16k → 11%YESHIVA TORAS AARON: $14k → 20%BAIS MEDRASH TORAS CHESED: $13k → 11%YESHIVA KEREN SHLOMO: $13k → 11%YESHIVA NER MOSHE: $13k → 11%AM FRIENDS YESHIVA DMIR INC: $12k → 20%SUSAN EISENBERG: $12k → 11%MARC EISENBERG: $24k → 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.

Beyond the US: 15% of all-years giving ($235k)

1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Canada$235k · 5 grants
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

78%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.4M · 27 repeat orgs$391k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +94% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

27 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 19 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

27
16

Total granted

$1.4M
$262k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+94%
0%

Still filing today

15%
6%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 56% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $129k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationReligionOther
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

  • YO
    YESHIVAS OHR HATORAH INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $51k · revenue +94%
  • YS
    YESHIVA SHAAREI OORAH INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $43k · revenue +37%
  • BM
    BAIS MEDRASH TORAS CHESED INC
    5× · 2020–2025 · $40k · revenue +57%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $81k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $60k
  • CO
    CONG OROS BETH YAAKOV
    one grant, 2017 · $18k
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

5 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. 5 of the 52 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)
5/5
Grantees still filing
4/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $235,030 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMISC (UNDER 5000): $220,760 · OtherMISC (UNDER 5000)Individual grant recipient: $151,736 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $151,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMISC (UNDER 1000): $106,299 · OtherMISC (UNDER 1000)Individual grant recipient: $80,635 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $65,225 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $64,250 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $60,000 · OtherYESHIVA K'TANA: $58,700 · Other+37 more: $466,613 · Other+37 moreYESHIVAS OHR HATORAH INC: $50,700 · EducationBAIS MEDRASH TORAS CHESED INC: $40,000 · EducationMASORES BNOS YISROEL INC: $11,100 · EducationOhr HaTorah: $3,600 · EducationYESHIVA SHAAREI OORAH INC: $43,380 · Religion
Other$1,660,748Education$105,400Religion$43,380

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 budgetYESHIVAS OHR HATORAH INC: $50,700 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetYESHIVA SHAAREI OORAH INC: $43,380 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetBAIS MEDRASH TORAS CHESED INC: $40,000 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetMASORES BNOS YISROEL INC: $11,100 over 3y, 0.5% 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 YESHIVAS OHR HATORAH INC ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA SHAAREI OORAH INC ↗
  • Who funds BAIS MEDRASH TORAS CHESED INC ↗
  • Who funds MASORES BNOS YISROEL INC ↗

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.

The Ojc FundJewish Communal FundNational Society for …Donors Fund IncJewish Community Foun…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Ojc FundNY17.8× affinity7 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · National Society for Hebrew Day Schools · Donors Fund Inc · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Egon & Telsi Birnbaum Fdn funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Egon & Telsi Birnbaum Fdn. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 26%
  • Yeshivas Ohr Hatorah Inc: 26% of income from government
  • Bais Medrash Toras Chesed Inc: 4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
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 52 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 Egon & Telsi Birnbaum Fdn’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