Skip to content

· Private foundation

Joseph Jacob Abraham Foundation

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.

$199k
Granted FY2024still arriving
19
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$36k
Largest
01What it funds
0174% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Religion$496kHuman Services$62kHealth$61kEducation$22kPhilanthropy$10kScience & Tech$4kEmployment$2kAnimals$2kOther$0
02FY2024 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k10 grants · $28k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $171k
$7,813
Median grant
3
States reached
$2.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CONGREGATION SHOMREI TORAH$36,000
Individual grant recipient$36,000
Individual grant recipient$18,500
Individual grant recipient$18,000
ADAS TORAH$18,000
WEST COAST VAAD HACHESED$12,000
CONNECTED ONLINE INC$12,000
EIS LECHENINA INC$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
THE WESTSIDE KOLLEL$7,813
PARTNERS IN TORAH$5,000
FRIENDS OF YAD SARAH$5,000
AISH HATORAH$3,600
YALDEI YISROEL EARLY LEARNING ACADE$3,600
WHISKERS AND TAILS FOUNDATION$1,500
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 (FY21–24, $62k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%COMMUNITY SPA MIKVEH: $50k → 14%COMMUNITY SPA MIKVEH: $10k → 14%GLOBAL KINDNESS: $1k → 14%GLOBAL KINDNESS: $1k → 14%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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$995k · 19 repeat orgs$141k to everyone else

19 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
20

Total granted

$995k
$106k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
0%

Still filing today

26%
5%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $36k 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
ReligionHealthHuman ServicesPhilanthropyAnimalsOther
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

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    7× · 2018–2024 · $189k
  • CS
    CONGREGATION SHOMREI TORAH
    7× · 2017–2024 · $186k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    6× · 2019–2024 · $163k

Funded once

  • RI
    RAV ISACSON TORAS EMES ACADEMY
    one grant, 2019 · $18k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $18k
  • YR
    YESHIVA RAV ISACSOHN TORATH EMETH A
    one grant, 2018 · $18k
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
Shaarei Halacha Inc
Philanthropy
3
Chabad Lametayel Inc

encourage and facilitate the observance of traditional orthodox Jewish practices around the world.

—
4
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
5
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
6
Sherit Isroel
—
7
Ahavas Torah V'chesed
Philanthropy
8
Chevras Shabbos Kodesh Podcast Fellowship
Religion
9
Rav Chaims Kollelim Inc

Rav Chaims Kollelim Inc is the American fundraising arm of Matar Hashamim. Matar Hashamim is an established Israeli religious organization that has been maintaining religious centers for worship and Torah study and managing charitable…

Religion
10
Chai Argentina Inc

Provided human relief to Sinagogue Baron Hirsch congregatns in the form of food pantry, religious services and education

Youth Development
11
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
12
Chasdei Chava Fund

Give out money for needy poor families

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chai Lifeline Inc; the most unlike its peers is Whiskers & Tails Foundation. 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

12 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. 12 of the 46 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/12
Grantees still filing
2/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $189,337 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCONGREGATION SHOMREI TORAH: $186,260 · OtherCONGREGATION SHOMREI TORAHIndividual grant recipient: $163,320 · OtherIndividual grant recipientADAS TORAH: $122,050 · OtherADAS TORAHIndividual grant recipient: $91,396 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTORAH CENTER OF LOS ANGELES KOLLEL: $41,869 · Other+29 more: $203,903 · Other+29 moreCOMMUNITY SPA MIKVEH: $60,000 · Human Services+1 more: $2,000 · Human ServicesFRIENDS OF YAD SARAH INC: $33,600 · HealthAMUDIM COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC: $5,000 · Health+1 more: $380 · HealthCONNECTED ONLINE INC: $22,000 · PhilanthropyWest Coast Vaad Hachesed: $12,000 · ReligionPARTNERS IN TORAH: $5,000 · ReligionMOSDOS SHAAREI CHAIM: $1,000 · Religion+1 more: $360 · ReligionWhiskers & Tails Foundation: $1,500 · Animals
Other$998,135Human Services$62,000Health$38,980Philanthropy$22,000Religion$18,360Animals$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$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFRIENDS OF YAD SARAH INC: $33,600 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetCONNECTED ONLINE INC: $22,000 over 2y, 9.1% of budgetWest Coast Vaad Hachesed: $12,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetAMUDIM COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPARTNERS IN TORAH: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetGLOBAL KINDNESS: $2,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetWhiskers & Tails Foundation: $1,500 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetMOSDOS SHAAREI CHAIM: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $380 over 3y, 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 COMMUNITY SPA MIKVEH ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF YAD SARAH INC ↗
  • Who funds CONNECTED ONLINE INC ↗
  • Who funds West Coast Vaad Hachesed ↗
  • Who funds AMUDIM COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC ↗
  • Who funds PARTNERS IN TORAH ↗
  • Who funds YALDEI YISROEL EARLY LEARNING ACADEMY INC ↗
  • Who funds GLOBAL KINDNESS ↗
  • Who funds Whiskers & Tails Foundation ↗
  • Who funds MOSDOS SHAAREI CHAIM ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE 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 Community Foundation of Los AngelesCA26.6× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · The Ojc Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · Zebulun Foundation · Jay Morris Foundation Inc · Hager Foundation · Goldner Family Foundation Inc · National Society for Hebrew Day Schools · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Joseph Jacob Abraham Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Joseph Jacob Abraham Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 20%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 Joseph Jacob Abraham Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Joseph Jacob Abraham 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.

    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 46 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 Joseph Jacob Abraham’s filings →

    More from the funding graph