Skip to content
Jonas Ehrlich Charitable Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Jonas Ehrlich Charitable Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$146k
Granted FY2024still arriving
20
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$36k
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 2024.

Religion$355kHuman Services$319kInternational$300kArts & Culture$38kEducation$34kCivil Rights$10kHealth$3k
02FY2024 · 20 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k17 grants · $66k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $81k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$3.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EMUNAH OF AMERICA$35,600
OHEL CHILDREN'S HOME & FAMILY SERVICES$32,600
Individual grant recipient$12,500
TIKVAH$9,000
ZAMIR CHORAL FOUNDATION$7,500
GREAT NECK SYNAGOGUE$7,500
CONGREGATION OF BNAI YESHURUN$5,000
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BNOT TORAH$5,000
WORLD JEWISH CONGRESS$5,000
PROJECT EZRA$5,000
SURAT HADIN CENTRAL FUND$5,000
FRIENDS OF ISRAEL DEFENSE$3,750
TZOHAR ISRAEL FOUNDATION$3,600
THE HAMPTON SYNAGOGUE$2,500
RABINICAL SEMINARY OF AMERICA$1,800
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 (FY17–24, $250k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%HAKSHIVA INC: $2k → 13%OHEL CHILDREN'S HOME & FAMILY SERVICES: $55k → 20%OHEL CHILDREN'S HOME & FAMILY SERVICES: $35k → 20%OHEL CHILDREN'S HOME & FAMILY SERVICES: $35k → 20%OHEL CHILDREN'S HOME & FAMILY SERVICES: $33k → 20%OHEL CHILDREN'S HOME & FAMILY SERVICES: $28k → 20%OHEL CHILDREN'S HOME & FAMILY SERVICES: $28k → 20%OHEL CHILDREN'S HOME & FAMILY SERVICES: $27k → 20%OHEL CHILDREN'S HOME & FAMILY SERVICES: $5k → 20%PROJECT EZRA: $4k → 17%SHALOM TASK FORCE: $252 → 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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$992k · 26 repeat orgs$67k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +75% since the first grant, against +25% for those funded once.

26 repeat relationships: 14 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
32

Total granted

$992k
$53k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+75%
+25%

Still filing today

42%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $14k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalHuman ServicesReligionHealthArts & CultureOther
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

  • OC
    Ohel Childrens Home & Family Services Inc
    8× · 2017–2024 · $244k · revenue +65%
  • NS
    NORTH SHORE HEBREW ACADEMY
    4× · 2018–2024 · $56k · revenue +75%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BNOT TORAH INSTITUTE
    6× · 2017–2024 · $40k · revenue +156%

Funded once

  • N
    NCSEF
    one grant, 2022 · $6k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $5k
  • CO
    CONFERENCE OF PRESIDENTS OF AMERICAN JEWIS ORGANIZAION
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
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
Sherit Isroel
—
3
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
4
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
5
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
6
Idf Memorial Foundation
Philanthropy
7
Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation
Philanthropy
8
Tal Hashamayim Foundation
Religion
9
Ohr Olam Corp

publish religious books

Religion
10
American Friends of Torat Eliyahu
Philanthropy
11
Zichroin Rabbeini Meshilem Feiish Ztl Foundation
—
12
American Friends of Amshinover Yeshiva Jerusalem Inc

Support of religious schools in Israel

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Emunah of America Inc; the most unlike its peers is Tefillin Time 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

20 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. 20 of the 64 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
14/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GREAT NECK SYNAGOGUE: $62,246 · OtherGREAT NECK SYNAGOGUENORTH SHORE HEBREW ACADEMY: $56,181 · OtherNORTH SHORE HEBREW ACADEMYIndividual grant recipient: $44,860 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCONFERENCE OF PRESIDENTS OF AMERICAN JEWISH ORGANIZAION: $40,000 · OtherCONFERENCE OF PRESIDENTS OF AMERICAN JEWISH O…ZAMIR CHORALE FOUNDATION: $40,000 · OtherZAMIR CHORALE FOUNDATIONCONGREGATION BNAI YESHURUN: $31,500 · OtherCONGREGATION BNAI YESHURUNPROJECT EZRA: $29,000 · OtherPROJECT EZRA+40 more: $117,966 · Other+40 moreEMUNAH OF AMERICA INC: $273,236 · InternationalEMUNAH OF AMERICA INCAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BNOT TORAH INSTITUTE: $40,000 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BNOT TORAH INST…Central Fund of Israel: $16,000 · International+3 more: $6,610 · InternationalOhel Childrens Home & Family Services Inc: $243,900 · Human ServicesOhel Childrens Home & Fami…+3 more: $6,252 · Human ServicesZAMIR CHORAL FOUNDATION INC: $37,500 · Arts & CultureTZOHAR ISRAEL FOUNDATION: $6,100 · ReligionZIONIST ORGANIZATION OF AMERICA: $4,000 · ReligionTEFILLIN TIME INC: $650 · Religion+1 more: $180 · ReligionChen Vchesed Vrachamim Inc: $1,500 · HealthCHAI LIFELINE INC: $1,000 · Health
Other$421,753International$335,846Human Services$250,152Arts & Culture$37,500Religion$10,930Health$2,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetEMUNAH OF AMERICA INC: $273,236 over 8y, 2.2% of budgetOhel Childrens Home & Family Services Inc: $243,900 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetNORTH SHORE HEBREW ACADEMY: $56,181 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BNOT TORAH INSTITUTE: $40,000 over 6y, 4.9% of budgetZAMIR CHORAL FOUNDATION INC: $37,500 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetCentral Fund of Israel: $16,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetOHR SOMAYACH INTERNATIONAL INC: $8,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetTZOHAR ISRAEL FOUNDATION: $6,100 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $4,250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetZIONIST ORGANIZATION OF AMERICA: $4,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetProject Ezra: $4,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BIMAD ALON MOREH INC: $3,600 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetHAKSHIVA INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetChen Vchesed Vrachamim Inc: $1,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetONE ISRAEL FUND LTD: $1,360 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF NISHMAT INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTEFILLIN TIME INC: $650 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetSHALOM TASK FORCE INC: $252 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE FOUNDATION FOR REMOTE JEWISH COMMUNITIES INC: $180 over 1y, 0.3% 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 EMUNAH OF AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds Ohel Childrens Home & Family Services Inc ↗
  • Who funds NORTH SHORE HEBREW ACADEMY ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BNOT TORAH INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds ZAMIR CHORAL FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Central Fund of Israel ↗
  • Who funds OHR SOMAYACH INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
  • Who funds TZOHAR ISRAEL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES ↗
  • Who funds ZIONIST ORGANIZATION OF AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds Project Ezra ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BIMAD ALON MOREH INC ↗
  • Who funds HAKSHIVA INC ↗
  • Who funds Chen Vchesed Vrachamim Inc ↗
  • Who funds ONE ISRAEL FUND LTD ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF NISHMAT 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.

Jewish Communal FundFjcAssociated Jewish Cha…Nash Family FoundationUnited Jewish Appeal-…The Mermelstein Found…The Slomo and Cindy S…Jewish Community Foun…The Ojc FundMorgan Stanley Global…American Endowment Fo…Gs Donor Advised Phil…
Jewish Communal FundNY31.1× affinity17 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Fjc · Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore · Nash Family Foundation · United Jewish Appeal-Federation of Jewish Philanthropies of New York Inc · The Mermelstein Foundation · The Slomo and Cindy Silvian Foundation Inc · Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Metrowest NJ · The Ojc Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc

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 Jonas Ehrlich Charitable Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Jonas Ehrlich Charitable Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–60%
    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 Jonas Ehrlich Charitable Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Jonas Ehrlich Charitable Foundation Inc 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 64 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Jonas Ehrlich’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