Skip to content
Kolel Chibas Jerusalem at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Kolel Chibas Jerusalem

An organization providing food, shelter, medical and social services, and cash stipends to assist needy families

$3.2M
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$73k
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$789k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $124,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $3,214,538 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $3,090,538 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.
$72,800
Median grant
1
States reached
$621k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CONG HISACDES HATALMIDIM$72,800
CONG SHEARIS MENACHEM DVISHEVE$51,200
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 98% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%CONG RAV SHALOM SEREDNA: $16k → 9%CONG HISACDES HATALMIDIM: $73k → 20%CONG HISACDES HATALMIDIM: $73k → 20%CONG HISACDES HATALMIDIM: $67k → 20%CONG TZVI LAZADIK BLUZEV: $65k → 20%CONG SHEARIS MENACHEM DVISHEVE: $57k → 20%CONG SHEARIS MENACHEM DVISHEVE: $51k → 20%CONG TZVI LAZADIK BLUZEV: $51k → 20%CONG SHEARIS MENACHEM DVISHEVE: $49k → 20%CONG HISACDES HATALMIDIM: $45k → 20%CONG TZVI LAZADIK BLUZEV: $44k → 20%CONG SHEARIS MENACHEM DVISHEVE: $43k → 20%CONG SHEARIS MENACHEM DVISHEVE: $37k → 20%CONG TZVI LAZADIK BLUZEV: $34k → 20%CONG HISACDES HATALMIDIM: $30k → 20%CONG TZVI LAZADIK BLUZEV: $23k → 20%CONG SHEARIS MENACHEM DVISHEVE: $13k → 20%AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INC: $12k → 20%CONG SHAARI TZION BOBOV: $7k → 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.

Grants abroad, by region: $3.1M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Middle East and North Africa$3.1M · 100% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: TO PROVIDE FOOD, SHELTER, MEDICAL AND SOCIAL SERVICES, AND CASH STIPENDS TO ASSIST NEEDY FAMILIES

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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$755k · 3 repeat orgs$34k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
3

Total granted

$755k
$34k

Still filing today

0%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

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

  • HH
    HISACHDIS HATALMIDIM DKEREN SHMIEL
    5× · 2020–2024 · $287k
  • CS
    CONGREGATION SHEARIS MENACHEM DVISHEVE
    6× · 2019–2024 · $251k
  • YZ
    YESHIVA ZVI LEZADIK BLUZEV
    5× · 2017–2021 · $216k

Funded once

  • CK
    CONGREGATION KHAL RAV SHOLOM INC
    one grant, 2018 · $16k
  • CA
    CONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INC
    one grant, 2018 · $12k
  • CK
    CONGREGATION KAHL CHASIDEI BOBOV
    2× · 2017–2018 · $7k
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
04the grantee network

0 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2024.

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 2024, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 0 of the 6 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
0/0
Grantees still filing
0/0
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HISACHDIS HATALMIDIM DKEREN SHMIEL: $287,100 · OtherHISACHDIS HATALMIDIM DKEREN SHMIELCONGREGATION SHEARIS MENACHEM DVISHEVE: $251,046 · OtherCONGREGATION SHEARIS MENACHEM DVISHEVEYESHIVA ZVI LEZADIK BLUZEV: $216,417 · OtherYESHIVA ZVI LEZADIK BLUZEV+3 more: $34,295 · Other
Other$788,858

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

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their 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.

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

The Ojc Fund
The Ojc FundNY12.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund

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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Kolel Chibas Jerusalem?

Find your warmest path to Kolel Chibas Jerusalem 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 6 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 Kolel Chibas Jerusalem’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