· Public charity
Gemach of Jackson Inc
The organization distributes funds to individuals in need as well as to other institutions which assist such people.
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.
The 6 grants below total $333,853 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $2,603,913 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $2,270,060 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k4 grants · $120k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $214k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HILLEL ACADEMY OF PITTSBURGH | $117,744 |
| AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA GEDOLAH | $96,567 |
| AHAVAS TORAH TZEDAKA FUND | $39,699 |
| YESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD INC | $30,000 |
| CONGREGATION MIPHAL TORAH VODAATH I | $25,000 |
| YESHIVA SHAARE TORAH INC | $24,843 |
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 (FY18–22, $42k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 19% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
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 +84% since the first grant, against +28% for the ones you funded once.
12 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down; 4 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, 41% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $198k 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
- AFAmerican Friends of Yeshiva Gedolah Matisyahu Inc2× · 2023–2024 · $357k · revenue -13%
- CKCONG KEREN ZICHRON CHAIM INC3× · 2018–2022 · $166k
- CZCONGREGATION ZICHRON MOSHE INC4× · 2017–2022 · $139k
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2019 · $590k
- CGCONGREGATION GATES OF MERCYone grant, 2022 · $463k
- CACONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INCone grant, 2022 · $88k
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 operate a religious school for high school and post high school students.
Providing jewish and secular education for elementary school aged children.
Parochial elementary school with a focus on sephardic tradition.
Religious School
Providing jewish and secular education for elementary school aged children.
Providing secular and religious education for elementary and high school aged students
The organization operates a religious/parochial high school and college in lakewood, nj.
Yeshiva toras aron is a religious elementary school providing quality education for grades k-8 for the children of lakewood nj.
To provide religious Jewish education.
A post-secondary school offering an educational program in talmudic study
Maintain communal and charitable affairs in accordance with the tradition of the orthodox jewish faith
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Vaad Harabbanim L'inyanei Tzeduka Inc and the most unlike its peers is American Friends of Yeshiva Tiferes Chaim Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 18 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 11% 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.
29 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. 29 of the 71 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
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 American Friends of Yeshiva Gedolah Matisyahu Inc ↗
- Who funds HILLEL ACADEMY OF PITTSBURGH ↗
- Who funds RUACH CHAIM INC ↗
- Who funds NACHLAS BAIS YAAKOV ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BAIS MEDRASH TAHAROS ↗
- Who funds VAAD HARABBANIM L'INYANEI TZEDUKA INC ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD ↗
- Who funds Community Kollel of Northeast Phila Inc ↗
- Who funds CHEDER TORAS ZEV ↗
- Who funds YESHIVAT SHAARE TORAH INC ↗
- Who funds MACHZIKEI YISROEL INC ↗
- Who funds Agudath Israel of California INC ↗
- Who funds TIKVA CORP ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF NEVEH ZION ↗
- Who funds TOMCHEI TZEDAKA CORP ↗
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: The Ojc Fund · Donors Fund Inc · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · Zichron Btz Tzedakah Foundation · The Sorala Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Lakewood Cheder School Inc · Toras Chesed Inc · Marbeh Shalom Foundation Inc · The Jmg Foundation · Keren Yud Mem Inc
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 Gemach of Jackson Inc 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.
- Yeshivas Ohr Hatorah Inc — 28% of income from government
- Cheder Toras Zev — 22% of income from government
- Bnos Melech of Lakewood Inc — 21% of income from government
- Masores Bnos Yisroel Inc — 7% of income from government
- Yeshiva Shaar Hatalmud — 6% of income from government
- Yeshiva Tiferes Torah Inc — 3% of income from government
- Nachlas Bais Yaakov — 2% 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.