Skip to content

· Private foundation

Fogel 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.

$50k
Granted FY2021
7
Grants FY2021
2
States reached
$15k
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

79% of Fogel Family Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to The Donors Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 2 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2021, the last year Fogel Family Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $50k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

3
’17
3
’18
5
’19
5
’20
6
’21
3
’22
3
’23
0
’24
2
’25

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

01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Philanthropy$233kEducation$231kReligion$189kFood & Nutrition$15kHealth$5kScience & Tech$5kOther$0
02FY2021 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2021

  • Under $10k5 grants · $22k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $28k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$30k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Rav Shayala's Kitchen$15,000
Cheder Toras Zev$13,000
Beth Abba Trust$6,800
Lakewood Cheder School$5,000
Yeshiva Torah Vodaath$5,000
CONG AHAVAS TZEDAKA VCHESED$3,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 40% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Cong Bais Shalom Inc: $5k → 13%Rav Shayala's Kitchen: $15k → 14%Cong Anshei Fallsburg: $50k → 16%Beth Abba Trust: $18k → 20%Yeshiva Tiferes Boruch: $3k → 10%Donors Fund: $137k → 11%KSAV SOFER RESEARCH INST: $5k → 13%Bais Medrash Ohr Chaim: $8k → 14%Cong Kol Torah: $15k → 20%Donors Fund: $96k → 11%Kollel Chazon ish: $4k → 14%Beth Abba Trust: $7k → 20%Cheder Toras Zev: $50k → 11%Beth Abba Trust: $5k → 20%Cong Zichron Chaim: $25k → 11%Beth Abba Trust: $5k → 20%Lakewood Cheder School: $25k → 11%Merkaz Hakololim Dhikyn Square: $2k → 14%Beth Abba Trust: $4k → 20%Cheder Toras Zev: $16k → 11%Beth Abba Trust: $3k → 20%Cheder Toras Zev: $13k → 11%Keren Acheinu Bnei Yisroel: $1k → 20%Lakewood Cheder School: $12k → 11%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF R C T: $24k → 20%Cheder Toras Zev: $12k → 11%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF R C T: $20k → 20%Lakewood Cheder School: $8k → 11%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF R C T: $17k → 20%Cong Meor Dovid Inc: $5k → 11%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF R C T: $14k → 20%Gemach Toras Imecha: $5k → 11%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF R C T: $8k → 20%Lakewood Cheder School: $5k → 11%Yeshiva of Bensonhurst: $5k → 20%Yeshiva Ruach Hatorah: $2k → 11%CONG AHAVAS TZEDAKA VCHESED: $3k → 20%Ein Od Milvado: $2k → 11%Yeshiva of Bensonhurst: $2k → 20%Amer Friends of Imrei Noam: $3k → 20%Yeshiva of Bensonhurst: $2k → 20%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF R C T: $2k → 20%Yeshiva of Bensonhurst: $2k → 20%CONG AHAVAS TZEDAKA VCHESED: $2k → 20%Yeshiva Torah Vodaath: $5k → 20%Mosdos Rabbainu Nachum Meshadyk Inc: $3k → 20%Mosdos Rabbainu Nachum Meshadyk Inc: $2k → 20%Amer Frieds of Zichron Eliyahu Inc: $10k → 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.

63%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$287k · 7 repeat orgs$170k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2021, 2 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call). Read against FY2021, 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

7
16

Total granted

$287k
$64k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+57%
+395%

Still filing today

57%
19%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $36k 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
EducationPhilanthropyReligionFood & NutritionOther
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

  • CT
    CHEDER TORAS ZEV
    4× · 2020–2023 · $91k · revenue +57%
  • LC
    LAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC
    4× · 2018–2022 · $50k · revenue +54%
  • BA
    BETH ABA TRUST
    6× · 2017–2023 · $41k · revenue +45%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $15k
  • AF
    Amer Frieds of Zichron Eliyahu Inc
    one grant, 2018 · $10k
  • BM
    Bais Medrash Ohr Chaim
    one grant, 2019 · $8k
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

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Toras Chaim Development Company Inc

Provide a building for a religious school.

Education
2
Yeshiva Toras Chaim of Greater Miami Inc

To operate a religious school for high school and post high school students.

Education
3
Birchas Yaakov Kollel Inc

Maintain communal and charitable affairs in accordance with the tradition of the orthodox jewish faith

—
4
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
5
Yeshiva Keter Torah Inc

Providing secular and religious education for elementary and high school aged students

Education
6
Yeshiva Gedola Na'os Yaakov

A post-secondary school offering an educational program in talmudic study

Education
7
Yeshiva Gedolah Rabbinical College Inc

Provide college level education and extensive background of jewish law and talmudic studies and rabbinical ordination.

Education
8
Yeshiva Toras Aron Inc

Yeshiva toras aron is a religious elementary school providing quality education for grades k-8 for the children of lakewood nj.

Education
9
Me'ohr Bais Yaakov Inc

To support schools of religious studies.

Religion
10
Kollel Ohr Hatorah Inc

To expand torah education

Religion
11
Cheder Menachem Inc

Education

Education
12
Yeshiva Beit Rafael

Religious & charitable- to provide funds to enable the study of torah.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Yeshiva Tiferes Boruch; the most unlike its peers is Reb Shayalas Kitchen. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

11 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. 11 of the 31 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DONORS FUND INC: $232,500 · PhilanthropyDONORS FUND INCBETH ABA TRUST: $40,900 · PhilanthropyBETH ABA TRUST+1 more: $1,200 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN FRIENDS OF R C T: $84,800 · OtherAMERICAN FRIENDS OF R C TCONGREGATION ANSHI FALLSBURG: $50,000 · OtherCONGREGATION ANSHI FALLSBURGCONGREGATION ZICHRON CHAIM INC: $25,000 · OtherCONGREGATION ZICHRON CHAIM INCIndividual grant recipient: $15,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $11,100 · OtherAmer Frieds of Zichron Eliyahu Inc: $10,000 · Other+17 more: $56,300 · Other+17 moreCHEDER TORAS ZEV: $91,000 · EducationCHEDER TORAS ZEVLAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC: $50,000 · EducationLAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL …+1 more: $1,800 · EducationReb Shayalas Kitchen: $15,000 · Food & NutritionMosdos Rabbainu Nachum Meshadyk: $4,300 · Religion
Philanthropy$274,600Other$252,200Education$142,800Food & Nutrition$15,000Religion$4,300

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetDONORS FUND INC: $232,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHEDER TORAS ZEV: $91,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetLAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC: $50,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetBETH ABA TRUST: $40,900 over 6y, 1.6% of budgetReb Shayalas Kitchen: $15,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMosdos Rabbainu Nachum Meshadyk: $4,300 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetKOLLEL CHAZON ISH: $4,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetYESHIVA TIFERES BORUCH: $2,600 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetYESHIVA RUACH HATORAH INC: $1,800 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetKeren Acheinu Bnei Yisroel Inc: $1,200 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMENUCHA U'KEDUSHA INC: $1,000 over 1y, 1.6% 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 DONORS FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds CHEDER TORAS ZEV ↗
  • Who funds LAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC ↗
  • Who funds BETH ABA TRUST ↗
  • Who funds Reb Shayalas Kitchen ↗
  • Who funds Mosdos Rabbainu Nachum Meshadyk ↗
  • Who funds KOLLEL CHAZON ISH ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA TIFERES BORUCH ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA RUACH HATORAH INC ↗
  • Who funds Keren Acheinu Bnei Yisroel Inc ↗
  • Who funds MENUCHA U'KEDUSHA 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 FundNY24.7× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · The Jimmy and Berta Khezrie Charitable Foundation · The Setton Foundation · Toras Chesed Inc · The Adjmi-Dwek Foundation Inc · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · Donors Fund Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust

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 Fogel Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Fogel Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 22%
  • Cheder Toras Zev: 22% of income from government
  • Yeshiva Tiferes Boruch: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Fogel Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Fogel Family 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 31 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Fogel Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph