Skip to content

· Private foundation

Hindy's 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.

$225k
Granted FY2023
8
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$128k
Largest
01What it funds
0151% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$326kInternational$17kHealth$11kPhilanthropy$7kHuman Services$7kArts & Culture$6kMembership Benefit$6kEducation$275Other$0
02FY2023 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k4 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $81k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $128k
$17,350
Median grant
1
States reached
$142k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$128,187
Individual grant recipient$39,700
Individual grant recipient$24,315
CONG MIKVAH TAHARA OF YETEV LEV INC$17,350
VARIOUS CONTRIBUTIONS LESS THAN 2000$6,822
CENTRAL UTA OF MONSEY$3,150
CENTRAL CONGREGATIONS OF YETEV LEV$2,826
HERITAGE FOUNDATION PRESERVATION JEWISH CEMETERIES$2,800
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, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%Keren Halbusha: $5k → 20%A TIME: $360 → 20%Atime: $216 → 20%Bonei Olam: $1k → 20%Bonei Olam: $1k → 20%Keren Halbusha: $36 → 20%Shabbos Achim: $2k → 20%Toldos Eluzer: $360 → 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.

49%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$436k · 26 repeat orgs$456k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +121% since the first grant, against +3% for those funded once.

26 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2023, 21 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
138

Total granted

$436k
$410k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+121%
+3%

Still filing today

23%
4%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $47k 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
Human ServicesReligionHealthPhilanthropyInternationalOther
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

  • KH
    KEREN HALBUSHA INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $5k · revenue +25%
  • RH
    REFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES
    3× · 2019–2022 · $4k · revenue +109%
  • BO
    Bonei Olam Inc
    2× · 2019–2020 · $3k · revenue +160%

Funded once

  • CM
    CONG MIVTZER HATORAH INC
    one grant, 2022 · $115k
  • VC
    VARIOUS CONTRIBUTION LESS THEN 1500
    one grant, 2021 · $48k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $28k
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
Gemilas Chesed Kramer Inc
Philanthropy
2
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
3
Shaarei Halacha Inc
Philanthropy
4
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
5
Chevras Shabbos Kodesh Podcast Fellowship
Religion
6
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
7
Ksav Sofer Inc
Philanthropy
8
Ohr Olam Corp

publish religious books

Religion
9
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
10
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
11
Ahavas Torah V'chesed
Philanthropy
12
Keren Avraham Shmuel Inc Wachman
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Toldos Eluzer Inc; the most unlike its peers is Ohel Torah. 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

15 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. 15 of the 167 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/15
Grantees still filing
11/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $206,902 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCONG MIVTZER HATORAH INC: $114,500 · OtherCONG MIVTZER HATORAH INCVARIOUS CONTRIBUTION LESS THEN 1500: $47,911 · OtherVARIOUS CONTRIBUTION LESS THEN 1500Individual grant recipient: $39,700 · OtherCENTRAL CONGREGATIONS OF YETEV LEV: $31,994 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $30,100 · Other+148 more: $381,494 · Other+148 moreYETEV LEV INC: $16,998 · Philanthropy+1 more: $550 · PhilanthropyKEREN HALBUSHA INC: $4,836 · Human ServicesBonei Olam Inc: $2,577 · Human ServicesSHABBOS ACHIM INC: $2,000 · Human ServicesA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $576 · Human ServicesTOLDOS ELUZER INC: $360 · Human ServicesTHE OJC FUND: $6,514 · EducationGEDER AVOS JEWISH HERITAGE GROUP INC: $5,700 · ReligionMIKVAH USA INC: $207 · ReligionREFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES: $3,675 · Health+1 more: $101 · HealthKolel Shomre Hachomos of Jerusalem Inc: $1,500 · International
Other$852,601Philanthropy$17,548Human Services$10,349Education$6,514Religion$5,907Health$3,776International$1,500

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 budgetTHE OJC FUND: $6,514 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGEDER AVOS JEWISH HERITAGE GROUP INC: $5,700 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetKEREN HALBUSHA INC: $4,836 over 2y, 12% of budgetREFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES: $3,675 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetBonei Olam Inc: $2,577 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetKolel Shomre Hachomos of Jerusalem Inc: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $576 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMIKVAH USA INC: $207 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetKAPAYIM INC: $101 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOHR BACHOSHECH INC: $50 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 YETEV LEV INC ↗
  • Who funds THE OJC FUND ↗
  • Who funds GEDER AVOS JEWISH HERITAGE GROUP INC ↗
  • Who funds KEREN HALBUSHA INC ↗
  • Who funds REFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES ↗

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 FundNY52.5× affinity33 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · American Friends of Bnai Levy Foundation · Blum Foundation · The Lexicon Foundation Inc · Yr Foundation · Tyrnauer Family Foundation · Zelig and Rifky Weiss Family Foundation Inc · Nimlach Foundation · Ddp Charitable Foundation · Rovna Ct Foundation · Madanim Foundation · D & E Steinmetz 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 Hindy's Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Hindy's Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%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
    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.

    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 167 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 Hindy's’ filings →

    More from the funding graph