Skip to content
Mosdos Nesivas Shalom Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Mosdos Nesivas Shalom Inc

The organization raises funds to support educational institutions which educate children and adults from kindergarten through undergraduate studies in beitar, israel.

$981k
Granted FY2023
5
Grants FY2023
3
States reached
$145k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2023.

Education$920kReligion$651kHuman Services$224kPhilanthropy$20kCommunity Improvement$10k
02FY2023 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $406,300, the rows itemized in this filing. The $981,300 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $575,000 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $391k
$116,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$164k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
YESHIVAT ATERET YISREAL INC$145,000
BINYAN YERUSHLAIM$130,000
CONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INC$116,000
SMD FOUNDATION$10,000
CONGREGATION HACHNOSAS ORCHIM LAKEWOOD INC$5,300
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 (FY22–22, $224k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%AHAVAS TZEDAKA: $224k → 11%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.

Grants abroad, by region: $445k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Middle East and North Africa$445k · 100% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR OPERATING EXPENSES OF SCHOOL.

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.4M · 3 repeat orgs$467k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2023, 0 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
5

Total granted

$1.4M
$312k

Still filing today

0%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 62% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $155k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23
Human ServicesPhilanthropyOther
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

  • CA
    CONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INC
    4× · 2018–2024 · $1.0M
  • BY
    BINYAN YERUSHLAIM
    4× · 2021–2024 · $300k
  • CH
    CONGREGATION HACHNOSAS ORCHIM LAKEWOOD INC
    3× · 2019–2023 · $33k

Funded once

  • AT
    AHAVAS TZEDAKA INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $224k · revenue +73%
  • AT
    ATERET TORAH CENTER
    one grant, 2022 · $40k
  • CC
    CHESED CHARTY FUND INC
    one grant, 2021 · $20k
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
04the grantee network

3 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. 3 of the 10 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
3/3
Grantees still filing
2/3
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INC: $1,024,500 · OtherCONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INCBINYAN YERUSHLAIM: $300,000 · OtherBINYAN YERUSHLAIMYESHIVAT ATERET YISREAL INC: $145,000 · OtherYESHIVAT ATERET YISREAL INC+5 more: $121,001 · Other+5 moreAHAVAS TZEDAKA INC: $224,000 · Human ServicesAHAVAS TZEDAK…The SMD Foundation: $10,000 · Philanthropy
Other$1,590,501Human Services$224,000Philanthropy$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAHAVAS TZEDAKA INC: $224,000 over 1y, 7.1% of budgetThe SMD Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 31% 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 AHAVAS TZEDAKA INC ↗
  • Who funds The SMD 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.

The Ojc FundJack Adjmi Family Fou…American Friends of R…Jewish Communal FundDonors Fund IncGs Donor Advised Phil…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…
The Ojc FundNY23.3× affinity10 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · American Friends of Rct Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · Donors Fund Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Mosdos Nesivas Shalom Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mosdos Nesivas Shalom Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%10%23%40%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
    1get no government money at all
    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 Mosdos Nesivas Shalom Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Mosdos Nesivas Shalom 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 10 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $871k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Mosdos Nesivas Shalom’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