Skip to content

· Private foundation

Mendel Family Charitable 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.

$21k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it funds
0162% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$278kPhilanthropy$13kYouth Development$11kHuman Services$11kInternational$9kArts & Culture$3kHealth$3kEducation$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $6k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
$1,800
Median grant
2
States reached
$6k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$15,000
BAYSWATER NEIGHBORHOOD FUND$2,000
YESHIVA NETZACH HATORAH$1,800
Individual grant recipient$1,800
VARIOUS OTHER DONATIONS$655
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 (FY17–23, $4k) 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.

area typical 11%MY EXTENDED FAMILY: $2k → 20%A TIME: $500 → 20%BONEI OLAM: $2k → 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.

69%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$396k · 28 repeat orgs$178k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +66% since the first grant, against +25% for those funded once.

28 repeat relationships: 4 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

28
71

Total granted

$396k
$177k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+66%
+25%

Still filing today

18%
17%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’25
ReligionEducationHuman ServicesInternationalYouth DevelopmentPhilanthropyOther
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

  • SH
    SHAVEI HEVRON INSTITUTIONS INC
    3× · 2019–2022 · $14k · revenue +65%
  • BB
    BNOS BAIS YAAKOV OF FAR ROCKAWAY
    2× · 2018–2019 · $11k · revenue +150%
  • AO
    ALWAYS OUR KIDS INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $11k · revenue +66%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $41k
  • KM
    KOLEL MATEH EFRAIM
    one grant, 2023 · $25k
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF AHAVAT SHALOM
    one grant, 2019 · $10k
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
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
2
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
3
Yeshiva Toras Chaim of Greater Miami Inc

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

Education
4
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
5
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
6
Ahavas Torah V'chesed
Philanthropy
7
Yeshiva Keren Hatorah of Passaic- Clifton

To operate a high school offering religious instruction and general studies as well as a post high school program of talmudic studies. the school shall be run under the standards of orthodox jewish law and tradition.

Education
8
Kollel Nefesh Hachaim Inc
Education
9
Yeshiva Chayei Olam

Yeshiva chayei olam inc., was established for the purpose of having an orthodox jewish high school. the school teaches talumdic studies, talmudic jurasprudence, orthodox jewish ethics and the old testament. in addition, the school provides…

Education
10
Yeshiva Gedola Na'os Yaakov

A post-secondary school offering an educational program in talmudic study

Education
11
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
12
Ohr Yisrael Yeshiva Inc

Ohr Yisrael is a religious institution that provides religious services and instruction to Rabbis and community members.

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chasdei Yisroel Inc; the most unlike its peers is Tzedakah Vchesed Inc. 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

19 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. 19 of the 100 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/19
Grantees still filing
12/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

YESHIVA DARCHEI TORAH: $77,660 · OtherYESHIVA DARCHEI TORAHVARIOUS DONATIONS: $74,462 · OtherVARIOUS DONATIONSIndividual grant recipient: $41,400 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTOVA UVRUCHA INC: $30,860 · OtherTOVA UVRUCHA INCKOLEL MATEH EFRAIM: $25,000 · OtherBAIS MEDRASH OF HARBORVIEW: $19,048 · Other+75 more: $232,398 · Other+75 moreYESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK: $18,600 · ReligionYESHIVA NISHMAS HATORAH INC: $2,500 · ReligionBEITH MATITYAHU CO BERNATH AND ROSENBERG: $2,500 · ReligionYESHIVA NETZACH HATORAH INC: $1,800 · ReligionKUPAS YOM TOV INC: $1,800 · ReligionCHAYIM V CHESED: $1,500 · Religion+1 more: $300 · ReligionSHAVEI HEVRON INSTITUTIONS INC: $14,400 · International+1 more: $360 · InternationalBNOS BAIS YAAKOV OF FAR ROCKAWAY: $11,054 · EducationCATSKILLS HATZALAH INC: $500 · Education+2 more: $610 · EducationALWAYS OUR KIDS INC: $10,760 · Youth DevelopmentBonei Olam Inc: $1,800 · Human ServicesMY EXTENDED FAMILY INC: $1,800 · Human ServicesA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $500 · Human ServicesCHASDEI YISROEL INC: $2,040 · PhilanthropyTIKVAH LYESOMIM INC: $500 · Public Benefit
Other$500,828Religion$29,000International$14,760Education$12,164Youth Development$10,760Human Services$4,100Philanthropy$2,040Public Benefit$500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetYESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK: $18,600 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetSHAVEI HEVRON INSTITUTIONS INC: $14,400 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetBNOS BAIS YAAKOV OF FAR ROCKAWAY: $11,054 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetALWAYS OUR KIDS INC: $10,760 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetYESHIVA NISHMAS HATORAH INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCHASDEI YISROEL INC: $2,040 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetBonei Olam Inc: $1,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMY EXTENDED FAMILY INC: $1,800 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetKUPAS YOM TOV INC: $1,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHAYIM V CHESED: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTIKVAH LYESOMIM INC: $500 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetCATSKILLS HATZALAH INC: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTZEDAKAH VCHESED INC: $360 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBAIS MEDRASH TORAS CHESED INC: $360 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGEDER AVOS JEWISH HERITAGE GROUP INC: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVAS KESSER YONAH: $250 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 YESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK ↗
  • Who funds SHAVEI HEVRON INSTITUTIONS INC ↗
  • Who funds BNOS BAIS YAAKOV OF FAR ROCKAWAY ↗
  • Who funds ALWAYS OUR KIDS INC ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA NISHMAS HATORAH 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.

The Ojc FundNY45.4× affinity27 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 · Md Friedman Family Foundation · Eisenberg Family Foundation Inc · Zichron Btz Tzedakah Foundation · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Moshe & Simi Mehlman Charitable Foundation Inc · The J W Foundation · Maalot · The Basch Family Foundation · Zichron Yechiel Mechel Foundation · J & E Wolf 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 Mendel Family Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mendel Family Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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.

    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 100 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 Mendel Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph