Skip to content
EU Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

EU Foundation

Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$10k
Granted FY2023
10
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$4k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Religion$37kHuman Services$33kEducation$12kPhilanthropy$6kHealth$2kInternational$630Youth Development$250Housing & Shelter$100Other$0
02FY2023 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$250
Median grant
1
States reached
$122k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$4,000
CONG AHAVAS CHESED$2,700
CHUSH$1,604
BELZ INSTITUTIONS IN ISRAEL$1,250
Individual grant recipient$250
Cong Ohel Yehoshua$200
KOLLEL BELZ$150
BTY FOUNDATION KUPAS HADAYANIM$100
CONG SIMCHA VNACHAS$100
DEENA MOTECHIN JACOBS FUND$50
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 87% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%various: $32k → 14%CONG SIMCHA VNACHAS: $200 → 14%BAIS MALKA OF LAKEWOOD: $5k → 11%CONG TORATH CHAIM: $3k → 14%CONG SIMCHA VNACHAS: $200 → 14%BELZ INSTITUTES OF LAKEWOOD: $5k → 11%KOLLEL BELZ: $2k → 14%BELZ INSTITUTES OF LAKEWOOD: $5k → 11%CONG BINAS YISACHOR: $2k → 14%KOLEL BELZ: $2k → 14%CHUSH: $2k → 20%CONGREGATION OHEL YEHOSHUA: $1k → 14%CONG BINAS YISOCHER: $1k → 14%CONGEGATION TOSHNAD: $400 → 14%KOLLEL BELZ: $350 → 14%CONG AHAVAS YISROEL: $250 → 14%BELZ INSTITUTIONS IN ISRAEL: $5k → 20%Cong Ohel Yehoshua: $200 → 14%CONG AHAVAS CHESED: $3k → 20%KUPAS EZRAH: $200 → 14%CONG AHAVAS CHESED: $3k → 20%CONG AHAVAS CHESED: $3k → 20%CONG AHAVAS CHESED: $2k → 20%CONG AHAVAS CHESED: $2k → 20%BELZ INSTITUTIONS IN ISRAEL: $2k → 20%CONG AHAVAS CHESED: $2k → 20%BELZ INSTITUTIONS IN ISRAEL: $1k → 20%BELZ INSTITUTIONS IN ISRAEL: $1k → 20%BELZ INSTITUTIONS IN ISRAEL: $1k → 20%BELZ INSTITUTIONS IN ISRAEL: $1k → 20%BTY FOUNDATION (KUPAS HADAYANIM): $300 → 20%BTY FOUNDATION (KUPAS HADAYANIM): $200 → 20%CONG SIMCHAS CHASANIM: $8k → 20%SIMCHAS TZADIKIM BELZ: $4k → 20%SIMCHAS TZADIKIM BELZ: $4k → 20%SIMCHAS TZADIKIM BELZ: $2k → 20%CONGREGATION SIMCHAS CHASANIM: $1k → 20%SAR SHALOM INC: $275 → 20%YMH BUILDING FUND: $250 → 20%KEREN HASHVIIS: $250 → 20%CONG BEIS YEHUDA: $5k → 14%CONG BEIS YEHUDA: $1k → 14%CONG BEIS YEHUDA: $250 → 14%CONG MACHZIKEI HADAS: $2k → 14%CONG BAIS MALKAH: $1k → 14%CONG MACHZIKEI HADAS: $500 → 14%EIZER BACHURIM: $250 → 14%CONG GMACH BNEI PINCHAS: $250 → 20%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.

53%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$64k · 23 repeat orgs$58k to everyone else

23 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2023, 14 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

23
40

Total granted

$64k
$58k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-68%
+3%

Still filing today

4%
8%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $200 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
ReligionEducationHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • CA
    CONG AHAVAS CHESED
    6× · 2018–2023 · $15k
  • BI
    BELZ INSTITUTIONS IN ISRAEL
    6× · 2018–2023 · $11k
  • BI
    BELZ INSTITUTES OF LAKEWOOD
    4× · 2018–2021 · $10k

Funded once

  • V
    various
    one grant, 2017 · $32k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $8k
  • BM
    BAIS MALKA OF LAKEWOOD INC
    one grant, 2019 · $5k
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

6 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2024.

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 2024, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 6 of the 64 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
4/6
Grantees still filing
3/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

various: $31,590 · OthervariousCONG AHAVAS CHESED: $14,500 · OtherCONG AHAVAS CHESEDBELZ INSTITUTIONS IN ISRAEL: $11,450 · OtherBELZ INSTITUTIONS IN ISRAELBELZ INSTITUTES OF LAKEWOOD: $10,286 · OtherBELZ INSTITUTES OF LAKEWOODIndividual grant recipient: $9,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $8,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $6,250 · OtherBAIS MALKA OF LAKEWOOD INC: $5,000 · Other+50 more: $25,143 · Other+50 moreBTY FOUNDATION INC: $400 · ReligionKEREN HASHVIIS INC: $250 · ReligionMachzikei Torah Inc DBA Zoireiya Vkotzer: $200 · ReligionYESHIVAS OHR V'DAAS: $50 · ReligionAISHEL INC: $100 · Housing & ShelterMIDRASH LMAN ACHI INC: $50 · Education
Other$121,219Religion$900Housing & Shelter$100Education$50

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBTY FOUNDATION INC: $400 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetKEREN HASHVIIS INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMachzikei Torah Inc DBA Zoireiya Vkotzer: $200 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAISHEL INC: $100 over 1y, 0.1% 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 BTY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds KEREN HASHVIIS INC ↗
  • Who funds Machzikei Torah Inc DBA Zoireiya Vkotzer ↗

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 FundAni Mamin FoundationYeshiva Chasidei Belz…Chaim V'Shulem Founda…Keren Yaakov Ben Mena…The Gds FoundationGreenzweig Family Fou…Zichron Simcha DsassovZichron Chaim Charity…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
The Ojc FundNY32× affinity16 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Ani Mamin Foundation · Yeshiva Chasidei Belz Belz Institutions in Israel · Chaim V'Shulem Foundation Inc · Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation · The Gds Foundation · Greenzweig Family Foundation · Zichron Simcha Dsassov · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 EU Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from EU Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%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 · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to EU Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to EU 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 64 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on EU’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