· Private foundation
Mazal Charitable Trust
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 it funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.
Where the money goes
Grants by size, and the largest recipients.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k25 grants · $99k
- $10k–50k16 grants · $332k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $229k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $129,325 |
| MACHNE GILA | $100,000 |
| AHAVAS CHESED | $48,000 |
| BOBOVER YESHIVA BNEI ZION | $31,650 |
| KEREN ORAH | $29,188 |
| YESHIVA MACHZIKEI HADAS | $25,000 |
| YESHIVAS TAL CHAIM | $24,820 |
| YESHIVA SHOLOM SHACHNA | $20,960 |
| Individual grant recipient | $18,427 |
| CONG YETEV LEV D'SATMAR | $18,000 |
| CONG AHAVAS CHESED D'BOBOV | $18,000 |
| RENEWAL OF LIFE | $17,000 |
| YESHIVA CHASAN SOFER | $16,400 |
| Individual grant recipient | $15,389 |
| BAIS MALKA OF LAKEWOOD | $14,315 |
Does the money reach high-need areas?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.
Its human-services grants (FY17–24, $48k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, 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.
How this is measured
How this is measured
Who it funds again
Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.
Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +44% since the first grant, against +40% for those funded once.
45 repeat relationships: 29 still active in FY2024, 16 since wound down; 14 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, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $106k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
How this is measured
Backed again, and grew
- RORENEWAL OF LIFE INC3× · 2019–2024 · $44k · revenue +193%
- BOBonei Olam Inc5× · 2017–2022 · $4k · revenue +224%
- CLCHAI LIFELINE INC2× · 2018–2019 · $3k · revenue +44%
Funded once
- CMCONGREGATION MACHNA SHALVAone grant, 2022 · $300k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2020 · $100k
- CYCONGREGATION YETEV LEVone grant, 2018 · $60k
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.
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.
Assistance to establish a community in ramat beit shemesh, israel, founded upon torah principles, prayer, justice, charity and kindness to all peoples. to encourage and promote jewish religious activities.
Religious Teaching
AFOMeomekHalevIncisformedforthereligiouscharitablepurposeofprovidingJewishministrytothespiritualandphysicalneedsofdisadvantagedJewishpersonsfamiliesandchildrenbetheylocatedintheNewYorkaroundtheUSinIsraelorelsewhere
To further jewish education in israel
How this is measured
25 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. 25 of the 148 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.
Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee
Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing
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.
Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · S&W Foundation Inc · B&M Steinmetz Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · The Fishoff Family Foundation · Zichron Yechiel Mechel Foundation · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore · The Rieger Charitable Foundation Trust · Tiger Hl Foundation · Fund for Life Foundation Inc
How this is measured
How much its grantees rely on government
Each dot is one organization Mazal Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mazal Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.
- Sharsheret Inc: 4% of income from government
How this is measured
Play a game based on Mazal’s filings →