· Private foundation
Mayer Simcha Leiter Charitable 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k8 grants · $32k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $132k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $131k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| EFRAT DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION USA | $65,600 |
| FRIENDS OF CHABAD OF HEBRON | $65,000 |
| KUMAN INC | $39,770 |
| FRIENDS OF CHABAD TZFAT | $30,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $17,450 |
| RABBINICAL COLLEGE OF AMERICA | $14,000 |
| BEIS MOSHE INC | $11,250 |
| MOTHERS OF CROWN HEIGHTS | $10,000 |
| CHEDER YALDEI MENACHEM | $10,000 |
| UNITED LUBAVITCHER YESHIVA | $7,265 |
| CHABAD OUTREACH IN ISRAEL | $7,200 |
| ASSOCIATED BETH RIVKA SCHOOL FOR GIRLS INC | $6,250 |
| COMMITTEE FOR JEWISH ADVANCEMENT | $5,000 |
| SHIMON & YEHUDIS LEITER FAMILY FUND INC | $2,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,500 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY19–24, $93k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +145% since the first grant, against +1% for the ones you funded once.
11 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 57% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $127k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- EDEFRAT DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION USA INC5× · 2019–2024 · $241k · revenue ×14 · 25% of their budget
- FOFriends of Chabad Tzfas Inc6× · 2019–2024 · $239k · revenue +347%
- MOMothers of Crown Heights Inc6× · 2019–2024 · $88k · revenue +45%
Funded once
- TETHE EFRAT DEVELOPEMENT FUND USAone grant, 2023 · $58k
- KAKINDNESS AND LOVE INCone grant, 2023 · $18k · 31% of their budget
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF POLNOOER INST INCone grant, 2023 · $14k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Charity
To provide support for jewish religious education in israel and around the world, and financial support to charitable organizations enabling such entities to fulfill their charitable purpose.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Friends of Ateret Cohanim Inc and the most unlike its peers is Zechut Avot Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 17 years old; the field is 18. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 10% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
20 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 20 of the 40 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds EFRAT DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION USA INC ↗
- Who funds Friends of Chabad Tzfas Inc ↗
- Who funds Mothers of Crown Heights Inc ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF CHABAD OF HEBRON INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF ATERET COHANIM INC ↗
- Who funds ASSOCIATED BETH RIVKA SCHOOL FOR GIRLS ↗
- Who funds FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND ↗
- Who funds KINDNESS AND LOVE INC ↗
- Who funds RABBINICAL COLLEGE OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF POLNOOER INST INC ↗
- Who funds CHEDER YALDEI MENACHEM INC ↗
- Who funds HEART TO HEART INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds HEBRON FUND INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED JEWISH COUNCIL OF THE EAST SIDE INC ↗
- Who funds THE TORAH LEARNING PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Central Fund of Israel ↗
- Who funds Just One Chesed Inc ↗
- Who funds FRIENDSHIP CIRCLE OF BROOKLYN INC ↗
- Who funds THE SOCIETY FOR THE PROMOTION OF JEWISH EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds ZECHUT AVOT FOUNDATION ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Nash Charity Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · The Ojc Fund · Lets Make It Happen Ny Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Committee for Furtherance of Jewish Education and Affilliates · The Rapoport Family Foundation Inc · United Jewish Appeal-Federation of Jewish Philanthropies of New York Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Mayer Simcha Leiter Charitable Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Rabbinical College of America — 3% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.