Skip to content
Koach Hatorah Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Koach Hatorah Inc

To provide financial assistance to needy individuals, and to religious, educational, and charitable organizations in us and abroad.

$325k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$36k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Religion$305kScience & Tech$22kFood & Nutrition$20kPhilanthropy$11kHuman Services$6kOther$0
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $65,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $324,867 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $259,367 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $60k
$13,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$5k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TIFERES TORAH$36,000
CONG ZICHRON SHMUEL$13,000
THE DONORS FUND$10,500
AFO HERITAGE HOUSE$6,000
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 (FY23–23, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%AHAVAS TZEDOKOS CORP: $5k → 11%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.

Grants abroad, by region: $176k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 2 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Middle East and North Africa$136k · 77% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CHARITABLE

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$40k · 23% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CHARITABLE

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

43%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$204k · 5 repeat orgs$276k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
14

Total granted

$204k
$276k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-20%
0%

Still filing today

40%
36%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
EducationReligionPhilanthropyHuman ServicesOther
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

  • CT
    CONGREGATION TIFERES TORAH INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $108k
  • CZ
    CONGREGATION ZICHRON SAMUEL-OHEL MOSHE INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $45k
  • B2
    BATTIM 2020
    2× · 2022–2023 · $22k

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $121k
  • TF
    TZUR FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $31k · revenue +28%
  • CZ
    CONG ZICHRON SHMUEL
    one grant, 2021 · $25k
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
Zocher Chasdai Ovos

Jewish Observance of Shabbos, Chagim, Torah Learning

Religion
2
Friends of Mitzzos Haaretz Inc

To promote religious observance in israel.

—
3
Yeshivas Toras Zev Inc

The purpose of this organization is to support indigent torah scholars and their families by providing stipends and additional funds at jewish holiday times.

Religion
4
Ateres Zekainim Inc

Charitable contributions and interest free loans to indigent torah scholars

Philanthropy
5
Kollel Ohr Hatorah Inc

To expand torah education

Religion
6
Zichron Meshilem Feish Inc

Provides finacial assistance to needy individuals and to religious, charitable organizations

—
7
Ohr Yosef Inc

To help disadvantaged children, widows and orphans by providing food, clothing, supplies and grants to charitable tax exempt organizations.

Philanthropy
8
Toras Chaim Development Company Inc

Provide a building for a religious school.

Education
9
Zera Koidesh Inc

To award financial grants to religios orthodox jewish organizations and to help by financial means, the needy, sick and disabled people.

—
10
Talmud Torah Tzfat Inc

We make grants to support orthodox jewish education.

Religion
11
Shekel Hakodesh D'satmar Inc

To provide financial assistance to religious,educational and charitable organizations worldwide to help them continue their activities.

Public Benefit
12
Birchas Yaakov Kollel Inc

Maintain communal and charitable affairs in accordance with the tradition of the orthodox jewish faith

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ahavas Tzedokos Corp; the most unlike its peers is Keren Zvi Yehuda 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

8 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. 8 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
2/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $120,520 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCONGREGATION TIFERES TORAH INC: $108,000 · OtherCONGREGATION TIFERES TORAH INCCONGREGATION ZICHRON SAMUEL-OHEL MOSHE INC: $44,500 · OtherCONGREGATION ZICHRON SAMUEL-OHEL MOSHE INCCONG ZICHRON SHMUEL: $25,000 · OtherCONG ZICHRON SHMUELBATTIM 2020: $21,835 · OtherBATTIM 2020CONGREGATION MESIVTA SHAAR HATORAH INC: $20,000 · OtherCONGREGATION KEREN HACHESED: $20,000 · OtherSHORASHIM CENTERS INC: $14,500 · Other+5 more: $33,485 · Other+5 moreTZUR FOUNDATION INC: $30,500 · ReligionTZUR FOUN…TORAH LINKS OF LAKEWOOD INC: $10,000 · ReligionTORAH LIN…AMERICAN FRIENDS OF RABBI MEIR SCHUSTERS HERITAGE HOUSE INC: $15,075 · EducationORLANDO TORAH ACADEMY INC: $5,200 · EducationDONORS FUND INC: $10,500 · PhilanthropyKEREN ZVI YEHUDA INC: $6,000 · PhilanthropyAHAVAS TZEDOKOS CORP: $5,025 · Human Services
Other$407,840Religion$40,500Education$20,275Philanthropy$16,500Human Services$5,025

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 budgetTZUR FOUNDATION INC: $30,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF RABBI MEIR SCHUSTERS HERITAGE HOUSE INC: $15,075 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetSHORASHIM CENTERS INC: $14,500 over 2y, 41% of budgetDONORS FUND INC: $10,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTORAH LINKS OF LAKEWOOD INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetKEREN ZVI YEHUDA INC: $6,000 over 1y, 8.8% of budgetORLANDO TORAH ACADEMY INC: $5,200 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAHAVAS TZEDOKOS CORP: $5,025 over 1y, 0.1% 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 TZUR FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF RABBI MEIR SCHUSTERS HERITAGE HOUSE INC ↗
  • Who funds SHORASHIM CENTERS INC ↗
  • Who funds DONORS FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds TORAH LINKS OF LAKEWOOD INC ↗
  • Who funds KEREN ZVI YEHUDA INC ↗
  • Who funds ORLANDO TORAH ACADEMY INC ↗
  • Who funds AHAVAS TZEDOKOS CORP ↗

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 FundJack Adjmi Family Fou…Jewish Communal FundFidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
The Ojc FundNY17.2× affinity7 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Koach Hatorah Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Koach Hatorah Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 60%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
  • Orlando Torah Academy Inc: 5% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
6get 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 Koach Hatorah Inc?

Find your warmest path to Koach Hatorah 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 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Koach Hatorah’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