· Public charity
Mikvah USA Inc
To promote the practice of traditional jewish ritual baths through development of ritual bath facilities and public awareness.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 47 grants below total $5,264,351 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $5,739,085 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $474,734 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $15k
- $10k–50k18 grants · $470k
- $50k–250k24 grants · $2.3M
- $250k+3 grants · $2.5M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| TAHARUSAM | $1,877,450 |
| CONG BAIS NUSEN DUVID | $315,000 |
| MILL BASIN MIKVAH ASSOCIATION | $300,000 |
| CHABAD EAST - MIKVAH BUILDING FUND INC | $218,000 |
| LUBAVICH ON THE PALISADES INC | $198,500 |
| LAHSER ROAD MIKVAH | $150,000 |
| GAN CHABAD TORAH CENTER | $130,000 |
| CONG DOR TIKVAH | $125,000 |
| CHABAD LUBAVITCH OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA | $120,000 |
| CHABAD JEWISH CENTER OF SALEM | $118,000 |
| CHABAD LUBAVITCH OF SOUTHWEST BROWARD | $100,000 |
| CONG BETH JEHUDA | $100,000 |
| TEXAS FRIENDS OF CHABAD LUBAVITCH INC | $100,000 |
| COMMUNITY SPA MIKVAH | $100,000 |
| CONG CHASAM SOFER | $84,000 |
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 (FY21–24, $701k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 82% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
73 repeat relationships — 30 still active in FY2024, 43 since wound down; 16 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, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.4M 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
- MBMILL BASIN MIKVAH ASSOCIATION INC7× · 2018–2024 · $4.4M · revenue -44% · 85% of their budget
- TITAHARUSAM INC2× · 2023–2024 · $1.9M · revenue +345% · 88% of their budget
- CBCONG BAIS NUSEN DUVID2× · 2023–2024 · $655k
Funded once
- COCHABAD OF WALNUT CREEK INCone grant, 2023 · $298k
- CLCONG LSHEMone grant, 2022 · $88k
- PMPHOENIX MIKVAone grant, 2018 · $80k
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.
To establish a ritual purifying bath in accordance of the jewish religious laws.
Operation of a jewish ritual bath
To promote the practice of traditional jewish ritual baths through development of ritual bath facilities and public awareness.
The organization's mission is to construct and operate a ritual bath house ("mikvah") according to orthodox jewish law concerning ritual family purity parctices.
Operation of Ritualarium or mikvah for use by women of the Jewish faith in accordance with the tenets of Orthodox Jewish belief.
Operation of ritual bath for the jewish community
To establish, erect and maintain a mikvah (or ritual bath) according to the laws of orthodox judaism, and to promote, disseminate, and further the fundamentals, concepts and practices of jewish family purity, in accordance with the laws of…
Enable local community to use ritual bath.
The corporation is organized and operated exclusively for religious, educational, and charitable purposes within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code. its mission is to provide a facility for ritual immersion in…
Ritual bath
The jewish women's club inc was created to construct, maintain and operate a mikvah,a jewish ritual bath for the use of the jewish community. they also promote the teaching of family purity.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mill Basin Mikvah Association Inc and the most unlike its peers is Charity Navigator. 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 23 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 8% of your grantees by number, and just 11% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
15 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. 15 of the 108 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.
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: The Ojc Fund · Rebbe's Partnership Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Chayim V Chesed · American Friends of Bnai Levy Foundation · Keren Hachomesh Inc · Hp Foundation Inc · Crain-Maling Foundation · The Rav-Noy Family Foundation Inc · Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore · Nash Charity Foundation Inc
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 Mikvah USA Inc 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Mikvah USA Inc?
Find your warmest path to Mikvah USA 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.