Skip to content
Manfred & Anne Lehmann Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Manfred & Anne Lehmann Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$810k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$700k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0187% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$841kReligion$145kHuman Services$44kHealth$37kCivil Rights$31kInternational$12kArts & Culture$10kPhilanthropy$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $50k–250k1 grant · $110k
  • $250k+1 grant · $700k
$699,677
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NLI USA INC$699,677
NLI USA INC$110,000
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 (FY21–23, $45k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF MANHATTAN: $28k → 17%BONEI OLAM: $1k → 17%SHALOM TASK FORCE: $7k → 17%SHALOM TASK FORCE: $5k → 17%SHALOM TASK FORCE: $5k → 17%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.

Which US states its grants reach

NY
OH
PA
NJ
CA
MD
DC
FL
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.

21%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$247k · 24 repeat orgs$934k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +35% since the first grant, against +24% for those funded once.

24 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 24 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

24
15

Total granted

$247k
$124k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+35%
+24%

Still filing today

38%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $810k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’21’22’23’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’21’22’23’25
InternationalHuman ServicesEducationReligionHealthPhilanthropyOther
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

  • CL
    CHAI LIFELINE INC
    3× · 2021–2023 · $17k · revenue +1%
  • ST
    SHALOM TASK FORCE INC
    3× · 2021–2023 · $16k · revenue +17%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM
    3× · 2021–2023 · $11k · revenue +117%

Funded once

  • MM
    MARIENE MEYERSON JCC OF MANHATTAN
    one grant, 2023 · $37k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $28k
  • TJ
    THE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER IN MANHATTAN INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $28k · revenue +45%
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
Sherit Isroel
—
2
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
3
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
4
Ezreinu Inc
Health
5
Physicians for Palestine
Health
6
Ohr Meir Ubracha

The organization provides financial assistance to victims of acts of terrorism in the state of israel.

Philanthropy
7
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
8
The Jewish Agency for Israel

The jewish agency binds jews across ideologies and civilizations together in a worldwide jewish family with israel at its center. it provides the global framework for aliyah, ensures global jewish safety, strengthens jewish identity and…

—
9
The Jerusalem Connection
—
10
The Keren Rachaim Fund
—
11
Ohr Olam Corp

publish religious books

Religion
12
Vaad Hapula Inc

Support jewry in Israel

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Partners in Torah; the most unlike its peers is Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania. 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

16 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. 16 of the 41 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)
16/16
Grantees still filing
13/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NLI USA INC: $809,677 · EducationNLI USA INC+2 more: $19,000 · EducationMARIENE MEYERSON JCC OF MANHATTAN: $36,900 · OtherMARIENE MEYERSON JCC OF M…NATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG ISRAEL: $30,000 · OtherNATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG…Individual grant recipient: $28,407 · OtherIndividual grant recipien…YESHIVA MESIVTA ARUGATH HABOSEM: $19,500 · OtherYESHIVA MESIVTA ARUGATH H…Teachers On Fire: $18,900 · OtherTeachers On FireORTHODOX UNION: $13,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $12,000 · OtherWOODSIDE SYNAGOGUE AHAVAS TORAH: $10,710 · OtherSHALEM CENTER: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherHATZALAH OF FIVE TOWNS ROCKAWAY: $9,600 · Other+15 more: $65,044 · Other+15 moreTHE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER IN MANHATTAN INC: $28,000 · Human ServicesSHALOM TASK FORCE INC: $15,645 · Human Services+1 more: $1,000 · Human ServicesCHAI LIFELINE INC: $17,400 · HealthBIKUR CHOLIM INC: $7,600 · HealthAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $11,400 · InternationalEZER MIZION: $5,800 · InternationalFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $1,000 · InternationalFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $5,755 · Arts & CultureDAILY GIVING INC: $5,500 · PhilanthropyNATIONAL JEWISH OUTREACH PROGRAM IN: $1,500 · ReligionPARTNERS IN TORAH: $1,000 · Religion
Education$828,677Other$264,061Human Services$44,645Health$25,000International$18,200Arts & Culture$5,755Philanthropy$5,500Religion$2,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER IN MANHATTAN INC: $28,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTeachers On Fire: $18,900 over 3y, 7.3% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $17,400 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSHALOM TASK FORCE INC: $15,645 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $14,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $11,400 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBIKUR CHOLIM INC: $7,600 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetEZER MIZION: $5,800 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $5,755 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDAILY GIVING INC: $5,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetKEREN OR INC: $5,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL JEWISH OUTREACH PROGRAM IN: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPARTNERS IN TORAH: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBonei Olam Inc: $1,000 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 NLI USA INC ↗
  • Who funds THE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER IN MANHATTAN INC ↗
  • Who funds Teachers On Fire ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗
  • Who funds SHALOM TASK FORCE INC ↗
  • Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM ↗
  • Who funds BIKUR CHOLIM INC ↗
  • Who funds EZER MIZION ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC ↗
  • Who funds DAILY GIVING INC ↗
  • Who funds KEREN OR INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL JEWISH OUTREACH PROGRAM IN ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES ↗
  • Who funds PARTNERS IN TORAH ↗
  • Who funds Bonei Olam 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 Communal FundVanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Jewish Communal FundNY14.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Manfred & Anne Lehmann Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Manfred & Anne Lehmann 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%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 Manfred & Anne Lehmann Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Manfred & Anne Lehmann 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 41 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Manfred & Anne Lehmann’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