Skip to content
Melohn Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Melohn Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$3k
Granted FY2021
21
Grants FY2021
2
States reached
$750
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of Melohn Foundation Inc’s FY2023 grant dollars went to The Ojc Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2023 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2021, the last year Melohn Foundation Inc named its own grantees at scale: 9 organizations, $3k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

11
’20
9
’21
0
’22
0
’23

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2023.

Philanthropy$2.8MReligion$465kHealth$3kInternational$554Human Services$36Other$0
02FY2021 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$100
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
YOUNG ISRAEL OF BEDFORD BAY$750
CONG BNEI ISRAEL CHAIM$600
Individual grant recipient$300
CONG ADAS YEREIM$300
YESHIVA IMREI BINAH$200
AGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA$200
Individual grant recipient$200
KINGSWAY JEWISH CENTER$180
YESHIVA GEDOLA OF CLIFFWOOD$100
GENERAL ISRAEL ORPHAN HOME GIRLS$100
BETH DIN OF AMERICA$100
YESHIVA CHASAN SOFER$100
NCSY$36
ZAKA$36
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM$36
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%ISRAEL CHILDREN'S CANCER FOUNDATION: $18 → 6%CHOFETZ CHAIM HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $18 → 14%GENERAL ISRAEL ORPHAN HOME GIRLS: $100 → 17%CONGREGATION ADAS YEREIM: $600 → 20%YESHIVA GEDOLA OF CLIFFWOOD: $3k → 6%ZAKA: $36 → 10%SHALOM TORAH CENTERS: $100 → 11%CENTRAL FUND OF ISRAEL: $400 → 6%SHUVU RETURN INC: $100 → 17%CONG ADAS YEREIM: $300 → 20%YESHIVA GEDOLA OF CLIFFWOOD: $100 → 6%RABBI MEIR BAAL HANEES SALANT: $18 → 11%BETH DIN OF AMERICA: $100 → 17%THE OJC FUND: $1.2M → 20%RABBI MEIR BAAL HANEES SALANT: $18 → 11%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $36 → 17%THE OJC FUND: $1.1M → 20%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $18 → 17%THE OJC FUND: $450k → 20%WEST SIDE KOLLEL: $600 → 17%TOMCHEI SHABBOS: $300 → 20%JOSEPH AND MAARTHA MELOHN TZEDAKA FUND: $450k → 17%KUPATH RAMBAHN KOLEL POLIN: $600 → 20%EZRAS TORAH: $200 → 17%CHMOL: $18 → 20%EZRAS TORAH: $100 → 17%YESHIVA IMREI BINAH: $200 → 20%CONGREGATION BNEI ISRAEL CHAIM: $4k → 17%REFUAH YESHUAH: $18 → 20%BIKUR CHOLIM OF MANHATTAN: $3k → 17%YESHIVA CHASAN SOFER: $100 → 20%CONG BNEI ISRAEL CHAIM: $600 → 17%YOUNG ISRAEL OF BEDFORD BAY: $2k → 20%CONG HEICHAL MOSHE: $300 → 17%YOUNG ISRAEL OF BEDFORD BAY: $750 → 20%AGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA: $200 → 17%CONGREGATION BAIS MOSHE SHMEIL KOZEVA: $400 → 20%NCSY: $36 → 17%KINGSWAY JEWISH CENTER: $378 → 20%YACHAD: $18 → 17%KINGSWAY JEWISH CENTER: $180 → 20%COUNT ME IN: $18 → 20%MEIR PANIM LACHAYAL INSTITUTE: $18 → 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.

2%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$7k · 6 repeat orgs$462k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +198% since the first grant, against +33% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2021, 0 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call). Read against FY2021, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
13

Total granted

$7k
$460k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+198%
+33%

Still filing today

17%
46%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 41% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21
ReligionInternationalHealthPhilanthropyOther
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

  • YG
    YESHIVA GEDOLA OF CLIFFWOOD
    2× · 2020–2021 · $3k
  • YI
    YOUNG ISRAEL OF BEDFORD BAY
    2× · 2020–2021 · $3k
  • KJ
    KINGSWAY JEWISH CENTER
    2× · 2020–2021 · $558

Funded once

  • JA
    JOSEPH AND MARTHA MELOHN TZEDAKA FUND
    one grant, 2020 · $450k · revenue +23%
  • CB
    CONGREGATION BNEI ISRAEL CHAIM
    one grant, 2020 · $4k
  • BC
    BIKUR CHOLIM OF MANHATTAN INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $3k · revenue +102%
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
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
2
Zichron Moshe Elihu Tzedoka Fund
Philanthropy
3
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
4
Sherit Isroel
—
5
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
6
Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation
Philanthropy
7
Tal Hashamayim Foundation
Religion
8
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
9
Israel Kuzminsky Memorial Foundation
—
10
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
11
Zichron Chaim Meir Foundation
Philanthropy
12
University of Judaism Foundation
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Ojc Fund; the most unlike its peers is Joseph and Martha Melohn Tzedaka Fund. 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

12 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. 12 of the 35 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)
12/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE OJC FUND: $2,750,000 · EducationTHE OJC FUNDJOSEPH AND MARTHA MELOHN TZEDAKA FUND: $450,000 · OtherJOSEPH AND MARTH…+24 more: $14,756 · OtherBIKUR CHOLIM OF MANHATTAN INC: $3,000 · Health+1 more: $18 · HealthKUPATH RAMBAHN KOLEL POLIN: $600 · ReligionYESHIVA IMREI BINA INC: $200 · Religion+1 more: $18 · ReligionCentral Fund of Israel: $400 · InternationalGENERAL ISRAEL ORPHAN HOME FOR GIRLS: $100 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $54 · InternationalSHUVU RETURN INC: $100 · Philanthropy
Education$2,750,000Other$464,756Health$3,018Religion$818International$554Philanthropy$100

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE OJC FUND: $2,750,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetBIKUR CHOLIM OF MANHATTAN INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetKUPATH RAMBAHN KOLEL POLIN: $600 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCentral Fund of Israel: $400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA IMREI BINA INC: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGENERAL ISRAEL ORPHAN HOME FOR GIRLS: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSHUVU RETURN INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $54 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetISRAEL CHILDRENS CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $18 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHOFETZ CHAIM HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $18 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 THE OJC FUND ↗
  • Who funds JOSEPH AND MARTHA MELOHN TZEDAKA FUND ↗
  • Who funds BIKUR CHOLIM OF MANHATTAN INC ↗
  • Who funds KUPATH RAMBAHN KOLEL POLIN ↗
  • Who funds Central Fund of Israel ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA IMREI BINA INC ↗
  • Who funds AGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds GENERAL ISRAEL ORPHAN HOME FOR GIRLS ↗
  • Who funds SHUVU RETURN INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM ↗
  • Who funds ISRAEL CHILDRENS CANCER FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds CHOFETZ CHAIM HERITAGE FOUNDATION ↗

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 FundThe Ojc FundJoseph and Martha Mel…Hyman & Ann Arbesfeld…F G FoundationThe Yale Fishman Fami…Zichron Chaim Charity…Mutual of America Fou…Chesed Ahavah Foundat…Joseph H Feldman Fami…The Tzedaka FundHouse of Gross Founda…
Jewish Communal FundNY21.2× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · The Ojc Fund · Joseph and Martha Melohn Charitable Foundation · Hyman & Ann Arbesfeld Foundation Inc · F G Foundation · The Yale Fishman Family Foundation · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · Mutual of America Foundation · Chesed Ahavah Foundation · Joseph H Feldman Family Foundation Inc · The Tzedaka Fund · House of Gross Foundation Inc

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 Melohn Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Melohn Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%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
    0get no government money at all
    1report 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, FY20–25
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Melohn Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Melohn Foundation Inc 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 35 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2021, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Melohn’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