Skip to content
Fund for the Needy Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Fund for the Needy 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.

$49k
Granted FY2021
4
Grants FY2021
1
States reached
$28k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2021.

Religion$582kHuman Services$274kFood & Nutrition$72kHealth$15kArts & Culture$1kPhilanthropy$1k
02FY2021 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2021

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $39k
$11,437
Median grant
1
States reached
$1k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FRIENDS OF KETER TORAH INC$28,000
YESHIVA BIRKAT ISRAEL INC$11,437
VARIOUS INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS$6,250
KOLLEL CHATZOS$3,500
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:

Its human-services grants (FY18–21, $193k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%FREINDS OF KETER TORAH: $63k → 20%FREINDS OF KETER TORAH: $59k → 20%FREINDS OF KETER TORAH: $41k → 20%FRIENDS OF KETER TORAH INC: $28k → 20%RENEWAL OF LIFE INC: $1k → 20%MISASKIM CORP: $1k → 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.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$804k · 19 repeat orgs$138k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +79% since the first grant, against +21% for those funded once.

19 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2021, 15 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
30

Total granted

$804k
$138k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+79%
+21%

Still filing today

32%
30%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21
ReligionPhilanthropyHuman ServicesEducationHealthOther
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

  • FO
    FRIENDS OF KETER TORAH INC
    4× · 2018–2021 · $191k · revenue +91%
  • YB
    YESHIVA BIRKAT ISRAEL INC
    5× · 2017–2021 · $68k · revenue +79%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF CHASDEI LEV
    3× · 2017–2020 · $50k · revenue +23%

Funded once

  • CA
    CONGREGATION ANSHI FALLSBURG
    one grant, 2018 · $25k
  • CK
    CONGREGATION KETER TORAH
    one grant, 2017 · $24k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $12k
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
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
2
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
3
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
4
Gemilas Chesed Kramer Inc
Philanthropy
5
Rashbi Tehillim Incorporated
Religion
6
Ohr Olam Corp

publish religious books

Religion
7
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
8
Ohr Yisrael Yeshiva Inc

Ohr Yisrael is a religious institution that provides religious services and instruction to Rabbis and community members.

Religion
9
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
10
Sherit Isroel
—
11
Ezreinu Inc
Health
12
Chabad Lametayel Inc

encourage and facilitate the observance of traditional orthodox Jewish practices around the world.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Friends of Chasdei Lev; the most unlike its peers is Teamms Foundation Inc. 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

17 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. 17 of the 50 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/17
Grantees still filing
13/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONGREGATION MERKAZ SHIUREI TORAH: $204,704 · OtherCONGREGATION MERKAZ SHIUREI TORAHVARIOUS INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS: $76,376 · OtherVARIOUS INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONSGROCERY BILLS FOR UNRELATED NEEDY INDIVIDUALS: $71,922 · OtherGROCERY BILLS FOR UNRELATED NEEDY INDIVIDUALSKOLLEL CHATZOS: $31,700 · OtherKOLLEL CHATZOSCONGREGATION ANSHI FALLSBURG: $25,000 · OtherCONGREGATION KETER TORAH: $24,400 · OtherCONG CHASDEI LEV: $24,250 · Other+27 more: $103,832 · Other+27 moreFRIENDS OF KETER TORAH INC: $190,820 · Human ServicesFRIENDS OF KETER TORAH …+2 more: $2,000 · Human ServicesYESHIVA BIRKAT ISRAEL INC: $68,396 · ReligionYESHIVA BIRKAT ISRAE…AMERICAN FRIENDS OF CHASDEI LEV: $50,183 · ReligionAMERICAN FRIENDS OF …LEV BEREL INC: $25,600 · ReligionLEV BEREL INCOHR NAAVA: $11,280 · ReligionOHR NAAVAYESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK: $10,000 · ReligionYESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK+2 more: $5,134 · ReligionCHAI LIFELINE INC: $5,500 · HealthAMUDIM COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC: $3,600 · HealthFRIENDS OF ADERES HATORAH INC: $4,300 · PhilanthropyAmatz Initiative: $1,800 · PhilanthropyTEAMMS FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 · PhilanthropyYeshiva Tiferes Yisroel: $3,780 · Education
Other$562,184Human Services$192,820Religion$170,593Health$9,100Philanthropy$7,100Education$3,780

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFRIENDS OF KETER TORAH INC: $190,820 over 4y, 5.2% of budgetYESHIVA BIRKAT ISRAEL INC: $68,396 over 5y, 10% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF CHASDEI LEV: $50,183 over 3y, 8.8% of budgetLEV BEREL INC: $25,600 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetOHR NAAVA: $11,280 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetYESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $5,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRECHAV LEV INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF ADERES HATORAH INC: $4,300 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetYeshiva Tiferes Yisroel: $3,780 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMUDIM COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC: $3,600 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCHUT HAMESHULASH INC DBA FALLSBURG COMMUNITY MIKVEH: $3,334 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetAmatz Initiative: $1,800 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetTEAMMS FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 45% of budgetRENEWAL OF LIFE INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMISASKIM CORP: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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 FRIENDS OF KETER TORAH INC ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA BIRKAT ISRAEL INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF CHASDEI LEV ↗
  • Who funds LEV BEREL INC ↗
  • Who funds OHR NAAVA ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗
  • Who funds RECHAV LEV INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF ADERES HATORAH INC ↗
  • Who funds Yeshiva Tiferes Yisroel ↗
  • Who funds AMUDIM COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC ↗
  • Who funds CHUT HAMESHULASH INC DBA FALLSBURG COMMUNITY MIKVEH ↗
  • Who funds Amatz Initiative ↗
  • Who funds CONGREGATION DORG ↗
  • Who funds TEAMMS FOUNDATION 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 FundJack Adjmi Family Fou…Jewish Communal FundThe Jimmy and Berta K…Associated Jewish Cha…FjcAllen I Gross Charita…The Basch Family Foun…Jewish Community Foun…Zichron Yechiel Meche…Zichron Chaim Charity…Jewish Federation of …
The Ojc FundNY48.1× affinity29 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · The Jimmy and Berta Khezrie Charitable Foundation · Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore · Fjc · Allen I Gross Charitable Foundation · The Basch Family Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Zichron Yechiel Mechel Foundation · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · Jewish Federation of Cleveland

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 Fund for the Needy Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Fund for the Needy 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 50 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.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2023) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2021, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Fund for the Needy’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