Skip to content
Machon by Charitable Trust at a glance

· Charitable trust

Machon by Charitable Trust

To carry on charitable, religious, scientific, literary or educational activities and to otherwise help people in need, either directly or via contributions to other tax exempt organizations that conduct similar support activities.

$1.2M
Granted FY2024still arriving
29
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01FY2024 · 29 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 29 grants below total $1,198,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,249,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $51,000 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 · $7k
  • $10k–50k21 grants · $566k
  • $50k–250k7 grants · $625k
$36,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$3.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TIFERETH SHMUEL$150,000
TAL ACADEMY$100,000
BNOT CHAYA ACADEMY$100,000
CHOFETZ CHAIM HERITAGE FOUNDATION$100,000
TAFKID$75,000
BONIM LAMOKOM$50,000
MANHATTAN HIGH SCHOOL$50,000
ZICHRON SHOLOM REFAL$38,000
BNEI AHARON$36,000
HATZOLAH FLATBUSH$36,000
YESHIVA SHAAREI ZION$36,000
LEV WITH LOVE$36,000
MACHANANYIM$36,000
MENUCHA SERVICES$36,000
CONGRAGATION EZER YEHUDA$36,000
02The need
02

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 (FY24–24, $90k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%AVIGDOR HELPING: $18k → 13%LEV WITH LOVE: $36k → 11%MENUCHA SERVICES: $36k → 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 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
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
2
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
3
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
4
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
5
Yeshiva Toras Chaim of Greater Miami Inc

To operate a religious school for high school and post high school students.

Education
6
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
7
Yeshiva of Los Angeles Girls High School

To provide academic excellence in both limudei kodesh and secular studies.

—
8
Yeshiva Yesodei Hachaim

To provide secondary high school education in Brooklyn, NY

—
9
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
10
Yeshivas Nachlas Bnei Shimon

To provide financial assistance to jewish educational and charitable causes.

International
11
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
12
Yeshiva Birkat Israel Inc

Education services

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Machanayim Inc; the most unlike its peers is Camp Extreme D/B/a Project Extreme. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

17 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. 17 of the 29 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)
16/17
Grantees still filing
3/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TAFKID: $75,000 · OtherTAFKIDBONIM LAMOKOM ZICHRON MOSHE DOV: $50,000 · OtherBONIM LAMOKOM ZICHRON MOSHE DOVMANHATTAN HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS: $50,000 · OtherMANHATTAN HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLSZICHRON SHOLOM REFAL: $38,000 · OtherZICHRON SHOLOM REFALMACHANAYIM INC: $36,000 · OtherMACHANAYIM INCBETH GAVRIEL BUKHARIAN CONGREGATION: $36,000 · OtherBETH GAVRIEL BUKHARIAN CONGREGATIONCONGREGATION EZER L YEHUDAH INC: $36,000 · OtherCONGREGATION EZER L YEHUDAH INCBNEI AHARON INC: $36,000 · OtherBNEI AHARON INCCONGREGATION SHALOM VESHALVA: $25,000 · OtherYESHIVA GEDOLAH OF WATERBURY: $25,000 · OtherICHUD MOSDOS HACHINUCH IN BROOKLYN: $25,000 · OtherYESHIVA ZICHRON MAYIR: $25,000 · OtherAGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA: $25,000 · Other+2 more: $22,000 · OtherYESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK: $150,000 · ReligionYESHIVA OHR YITZCHOKCHOFETZ CHAIM HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $100,000 · ReligionCHOFETZ CHAIM HERITAGE FOU…FRESH START CENTER: $25,000 · ReligionFRESH START CENTERBNOT CHAYA ACADEMY CORP: $100,000 · EducationBNOT CHAYA ACADEMY C…LAPID YESHIVA INC: $100,000 · EducationLAPID YESHIVA INCSHULAMITH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS INC: $18,000 · EducationSHULAMITH SCHOOL FOR…Lev with Love Inc: $36,000 · Human ServicesMENUCHA CHESED SERVICES CORP: $36,000 · Human ServicesAVIGDORS HELPING HAND INC: $18,000 · Human ServicesFLATBUSH VOLUNTEERS OF HATZOLOH INC: $36,000 · HealthBINA STROKE AND BRAIN INJURY ASSISTANCE INC: $25,000 · HealthQUALITY OF LIFE IN MEMORY OF SHILOM NEUMAN: $10,000 · HealthCAMP EXTREME D/B/A PROJECT EXTREME: $25,000 · Youth DevelopmentNE EMAN FOUNDATION USA: $15,000 · International
Other$504,000Religion$275,000Education$218,000Human Services$90,000Health$71,000Youth Development$25,000International$15,000

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 budgetYESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK: $150,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetCHOFETZ CHAIM HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetLAPID YESHIVA INC: $100,000 over 1y, 8.0% of budgetLev with Love Inc: $36,000 over 1y, 5.1% of budgetFLATBUSH VOLUNTEERS OF HATZOLOH INC: $36,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetMENUCHA CHESED SERVICES CORP: $36,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetBINA STROKE AND BRAIN INJURY ASSISTANCE INC: $25,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetFRESH START CENTER: $25,000 over 1y, 3.5% of budgetCAMP EXTREME D/B/A PROJECT EXTREME: $25,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetYESHIVA ZICHRON MAYIR: $25,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetAGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAVIGDORS HELPING HAND INC: $18,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetSHULAMITH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS INC: $18,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNE EMAN FOUNDATION USA: $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetQUALITY OF LIFE IN MEMORY OF SHILOM NEUMAN: $10,000 over 1y, 1.3% 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.

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 FundJewish Communal FundJack Adjmi Family Fou…Cross River Community…Associated Jewish Cha…The Yad Charity Found…Zichron Chaim Charity…United Jewish Appeal-…Jewish Federation of …FjcGs Donor Advised Phil…National Philanthropi…
The Ojc FundNY38.6× affinity21 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Cross River Community Foundation · Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore · The Yad Charity Foundation · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · United Jewish Appeal-Federation of Jewish Philanthropies of New York Inc · Jewish Federation of Cleveland · Fjc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust

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 Machon by Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Machon by Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 20%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get 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 · 0–5%
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Machon by Charitable Trust?

    Find your warmest path to Machon by Charitable Trust 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 29 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 Machon by’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