Skip to content

· Private foundation

M & M Fischer 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.

$30k
Granted FY2023
47
Grants FY2023
3
States reached
$12k
Largest
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 2023.

Religion$301kHealth$8kRecreation & Sports$5kInternational$1kHuman Services$1kEducation$892Philanthropy$750Food & Nutrition$500Other$0
02FY2023 · 47 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k46 grants · $18k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $12k
$180
Median grant
3
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$11,500
Mevakshe Hashem$4,350
Individual grant recipient$2,650
Bais Hamedrash Tiferes Mordechai$1,000
Cong Yetev Lev$1,000
Zichron Shlome$850
Individual grant recipient$750
Individual grant recipient$542
Agudat Refua v'Chaim$500
Lomdei Torah$500
Individual grant recipient$360
Tov V'Chesed Foundation$320
Individual grant recipient$300
Ahavas Chesed$250
Individual grant recipient$250
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 (FY17–23, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, 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%Chaim Medical Resources: $220 → 14%Chaim Medical Resources: $120 → 14%Misaskim: $108 → 20%Bonei Olam: $1k → 20%Bonei Olam: $1k → 20%Bonei Olam: $680 → 20%Food for families: $180 → 20%A Time: $180 → 20%Misaskim: $250 → 20%Food for families: $120 → 20%Bonei Olam: $250 → 20%Bonei Olam: $150 → 20%Misaskim: $100 → 20%Bonei Olam: $36 → 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.
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.

67%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$215k · 86 repeat orgs$104k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +34% since the first grant, against +32% for those funded once.

86 repeat relationships: 19 still active in FY2023, 67 since wound down; 27 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

86
220

Total granted

$215k
$97k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+34%
+32%

Still filing today

14%
8%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 77% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
ReligionHuman ServicesEducationHealthPhilanthropyInternationalOther
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

  • BO
    Bonei Olam Inc
    4× · 2017–2023 · $3k · revenue +224%
  • CL
    CHAI LIFELINE INC
    2× · 2017–2020 · $2k · revenue +58%
  • LB
    LEV BEREL INC
    2× · 2018–2021 · $1k · revenue +21%

Funded once

  • KS
    Ksav Sofer Pesach Institute
    one grant, 2021 · $10k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
  • CR
    CONGREGATION RAMAT SCHLOMO
    one grant, 2021 · $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
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
2
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
3
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
4
Chabad Lametayel Inc

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

—
5
Gemilas Chesed Kramer Inc
Philanthropy
6
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
7
Ahavas Torah V'chesed
Philanthropy
8
Tal Hashamayim Foundation
Religion
9
Sherit Isroel
—
10
Shaarei Halacha Inc
Philanthropy
11
Chevras Shabbos Kodesh Podcast Fellowship
Religion
12
Mishken Chaim Rivnits

Assistance to the indigent

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Yeshiva Ruach Chaim Inc; the most unlike its peers is Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel. 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

34 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. 34 of the 334 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
32/34
Grantees still filing
25/34
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $87,628 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $21,635 · OtherIndividual grant recipientKsav Sofer Pesach Institute: $10,000 · OtherYESHIVAS NOVOMINSK: $9,650 · Other+174 more: $159,454 · Other+174 moreBonei Olam Inc: $3,116 · Human ServicesMISASKIM CORP: $458 · Human ServicesCHAIM MEDICAL RESOURCE INC: $340 · Human ServicesFOOD FOR FAMILIES INC: $300 · Human ServicesCHAI LIFELINE INC: $1,600 · HealthLeChaim Charities Inc: $1,000 · HealthAMUDIM COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC: $500 · HealthKAPAYIM INC: $370 · HealthLEV BEREL INC: $1,180 · ReligionVAAD HARABBANIM L'INYANEI TZEDUKA INC: $850 · ReligionTOMCHEI TZEDAKA CORP: $650 · ReligionYESHIVA RUACH CHAIM INC: $500 · ReligionAMERICAN FRIENDS OF HALICHOT HA'ARETZ: $180 · ReligionYESHIVA OHR YISROEL: $500 · PhilanthropyTHE LIGHT FOUNDATION INC: $500 · PhilanthropyYETEV LEV INC: $298 · PhilanthropyDAAS MEISHARIM: $250 · PhilanthropyTOV VCHESED FOUNDATION INC: $570 · InternationalCentral Fund of Israel: $500 · InternationalYESHIVA CHAYEI OLAM: $272 · EducationBEER YESHAYA CHEDER BEER YESHAYA: $250 · EducationMESIVTA OF CLIFTON INC: $220 · Education
Other$288,367Human Services$4,214Health$3,470Religion$3,360Philanthropy$1,548International$1,070Education$742

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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 budgetBonei Olam Inc: $3,116 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $1,600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLEV BEREL INC: $1,180 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLeChaim Charities Inc: $1,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetVAAD HARABBANIM L'INYANEI TZEDUKA INC: $850 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTOMCHEI TZEDAKA CORP: $650 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTOV VCHESED FOUNDATION INC: $570 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA RUACH CHAIM INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YAGDIL TORAH INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMUDIM COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE LIGHT FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMISASKIM CORP: $458 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetKAPAYIM INC: $370 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHAIM MEDICAL RESOURCE INC: $340 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFOOD FOR FAMILIES INC: $300 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA CHAYEI OLAM: $272 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBEER YESHAYA CHEDER BEER YESHAYA: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDAAS MEISHARIM: $250 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetYESHIVA DERECH CHAIM: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMESIVTA OF CLIFTON INC: $220 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVYAZREIM INC: $180 over 1y, 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 Bonei Olam Inc ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗
  • Who funds LEV BEREL 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.

The Ojc FundNY71.5× affinity63 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Donors Fund Inc · The Jimmy and Berta Khezrie Charitable Foundation · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · Zichron Btz Tzedakah Foundation · The Reich Family Charitable Trust · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Jewish Communal Fund · The Jmg Foundation · Greenzweig Family Foundation · Hf 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 M & M Fischer Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from M & M Fischer Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 70%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 10%
  • Yeshiva Chayei Olam: 10% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
7get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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.

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 334 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record but names no grant recipient in the published copy, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on M & M Fischer’s filings →

More from the funding graph