· Private foundation
Joseph and Martha Melohn Charitable Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 78% of JOSEPH AND MARTHA MELOHN CHARITABLE FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k10 grants · $7k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BIKUR CHOLIM OF MANHATTAN | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,500 |
| CONGREGATION BNAI ISRAEL CHAIM | $1,400 |
| Individual grant recipient | $500 |
| CONG ADAS YEREIM | $500 |
| YESHIVA BAIS MIKROH | $500 |
| BAIS MEDRASH OHR CHAIM | $500 |
| WESTSIDE KOLLEL | $500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $400 |
| KUPATH RAMBAHN KOLEL POLIN | $300 |
| CONG ZICHRON MORDCHAI SHLOMO | $300 |
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 (FY20–21, $13k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 78% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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 +52% since the first grant, against +14% for the ones you funded once.
27 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 20 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k 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
- BCBIKUR CHOLIM OF MANHATTAN INC4× · 2020–2025 · $30k · revenue +102%
- YOYESHIVA OHAVEI TORAH OF RIVERDALE INC2× · 2021–2022 · $28k · revenue +9%
- YCYAD CHAYA INC2× · 2020–2021 · $10k · revenue +86%
Funded once
- HEHATZOLAH EMERGENCY AIR RESPONSE TEAM INCgraduatedone grant, 2024 · $180k · revenue ×141
- AFAmerican Friends of Ramot Torah Schoolsone grant, 2020 · $100k · revenue -39%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2020 · $100k
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.
Religious School
To operate a religious school for high school and post high school students.
Maintain communal and charitable affairs in accordance with the tradition of the orthodox jewish faith
Religious & charitable- to provide funds to enable the study of torah.
To provide financial assistance to jewish educational and charitable causes.
To provide secondary high school education in Brooklyn, NY
Provide financial assistance to needy individuals, and to religious, educational, and charitable organizations in us and abroad.
Provide college level education and extensive background of jewish law and talmudic studies and rabbinical ordination.
A jewish secondary school which seeks to inculcate its students with high character and religious values to produce future religious leaders
To further jewish education in israel
To support and promote the study of torah (bible) among members of jewish faith worldwide.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Yeshiva Ktana of Passaic and the most unlike its peers is Our Place Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 33 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% 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.
23 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. 23 of the 106 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 HATZOLAH EMERGENCY AIR RESPONSE TEAM INC ↗
- Who funds American Friends of Ramot Torah Schools ↗
- Who funds AGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds THE OJC FUND ↗
- Who funds BIKUR CHOLIM OF MANHATTAN INC ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA OHAVEI TORAH OF RIVERDALE INC ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA KTANA OF PASSAIC ↗
- Who funds YAD CHAYA INC ↗
- Who funds DONORS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds HINENI INC ↗
- Who funds OUR PLACE INC ↗
- Who funds LAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds DAVIS MEMORIAL FUND INC ↗
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 · Jewish Communal Fund · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Joseph and Martha Melohn Tzedaka Fund · The Ohr Hakotel Foundation · The Fishoff Family Foundation · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · The Nathan and Marilyn Silberman Fdn · Marbeh Shalom Foundation Inc · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · The Yale Fishman Family Foundation · The Zev and Susan Munk Family Foundation
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 Joseph and Martha Melohn Charitable Foundation 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Joseph and Martha Melohn Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Joseph and Martha Melohn Charitable 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.