Skip to content
Helping Israel Fund at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Helping Israel Fund

To raise funds for specific projects in Israel which render financial assistance to individuals and organizations such as environmental, youth education and training programs

$393k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$150k
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 2025.

Human Services$1.8MInternational$1.1MPhilanthropy$111kArts & Culture$87kEducation$75kHealth$53kReligion$34k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $264,040, the rows itemized in this filing. The $393,468 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $129,428 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k5 grants · $114k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $150k
$25,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$679k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Yashar Lachayal$150,000
Jewish National Fund$40,540
Thank Israeli Soldiers$25,000
Giving Group Community$20,000
Ascent Institute$18,000
Neeman Foundation USA$10,500
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 (FY17–25, $1.7M) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 3% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Israel Heart2heart Inc: $25k → 13%Yashar Lachayal: $631k → 8%Yedidim USA Inc: $15k → 13%Yashar Lachayal: $446k → 8%Yashar Lachayal: $150k → 8%Yashar Lachayal: $100k → 8%Yashar Lachayal: $100k → 8%Yashar Lachayal: $86k → 8%Yashar Lachayal: $79k → 8%Yashar Lachayal: $79k → 8%Belev Echad Inc: $20k → 17%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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.1M · 8 repeat orgs$245k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +56% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
8

Total granted

$2.1M
$210k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+56%
0%

Still filing today

88%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $36k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’23’24’25
InternationalHuman ServicesReligionArts & CulturePublic Safety & DisasterPhilanthropyOther
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 Yashar L'Chayal Inc
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.7M · revenue +169%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC
    7× · 2017–2024 · $87k · revenue +383%
  • AD
    ASCENT-INNER DIMENSIONS OF JEWISH LIFESTYLE INC
    7× · 2017–2025 · $83k · revenue +70%

Funded once

  • FO
    FRIENDS OF DUVDEVAN
    one grant, 2024 · $50k · revenue 0%
  • TP
    THE PFAP FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2024 · $38k
  • OI
    ONE ISRAEL FUND LTD
    one grant, 2024 · $27k · revenue 0%
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
Sherit Isroel
—
2
Idf Memorial Foundation
Philanthropy
3
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
4
American Friends of Even Yisroel Charitable Foundation
Philanthropy
5
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
6
American Friends of Tzir Hemed
Philanthropy
7
Yad Yosef Foundation
Philanthropy
8
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
9
University of Judaism Foundation
—
10
Israel Restoration Ministries
Religion
11
Bais Yisrael Foundation
—
12
Israel Initiative 2020 Inc
International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is One Israel Fund Ltd; the most unlike its peers is Yedidim Usa 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

19 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. 19 of the 20 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)
19/19
Grantees still filing
10/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Friends of Yashar L'Chayal Inc: $1,670,061 · Human ServicesFriends of Yashar L'Chayal Inc+3 more: $60,000 · Human ServicesJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $752,540 · InternationalJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEM…FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $80,000 · InternationalFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FOR…+6 more: $117,500 · International+6 moreTHE GIVING BACK FUND: $111,000 · PhilanthropyFRIENDS OF DUVDEVAN: $50,000 · PhilanthropyASCENT-INNER DIMENSIONS OF JEWISH LIFESTYLE INC: $83,140 · ReligionTHE PFAP FOUNDATION INC: $37,500 · ReligionSOLDIERS SAVE LIVES CORPORATION: $118,200 · Public Safety & DisasterFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $87,000 · Arts & CultureAMERICAN FRIENDS OF HERZOG HOSPITAL INC: $28,000 · HealthNATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG ISRAEL: $15,600 · Other
Human Services$1,730,061International$950,040Philanthropy$161,000Religion$120,640Public Safety & Disaster$118,200Arts & Culture$87,000Health$28,000Other$15,600

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFriends of Yashar L'Chayal Inc: $1,670,061 over 9y, 17% of budgetJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $752,540 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetSOLDIERS SAVE LIVES CORPORATION: $118,200 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetTHE GIVING BACK FUND: $111,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $87,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetASCENT-INNER DIMENSIONS OF JEWISH LIFESTYLE INC: $83,140 over 7y, 1.5% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $80,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF DUVDEVAN: $50,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF HERZOG HOSPITAL INC: $28,000 over 2y, 5.7% of budgetONE ISRAEL FUND LTD: $27,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF SOROKA MEDICAL CENTER INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetISRAEL HEART2HEART INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetFRIENDS OF ISRAEL SCOUTS INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetBELEV ECHAD INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BNEI AKIVA YESHIVOT IN ISRAEL INC: $10,000 over 2y, 1.0% 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.

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.

Jewish Communal FundDallas Jewish Communi…Gs Donor Advised Phil…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…Morgan Stanley Global…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Jewish Communal FundNY21.9× affinity10 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Dallas Jewish Community Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Helping Israel Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Helping Israel Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%1%5%11%20%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
    5get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 Helping Israel Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Helping Israel Fund 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 20 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 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 Helping Israel’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