Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

My Charity Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$23k
Granted FY2019
11
Grants FY2019
3
States reached
$9k
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of My Charity Foundation Inc’s FY2022 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. FY2022 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2019, the last year My Charity Foundation Inc named its own grantees at scale: 5 organizations, $23k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

2
18
5
19
1
20
1
21
0
22

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

01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20182022.

Human Services$91kReligion$25kFood & Nutrition$12kPhilanthropy$8kInternational$4k
02FY2019 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$1,430
Median grant
3
States reached
$3k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VAYOEL MOSHE CORP$9,000
YETEV LEV$3,600
TALMUD TORA BRESLEV$2,460
REB SHIMON LAKOL INC$1,900
UTA OF KJ$1,600
BEIS VAAD$1,430
LADIES AUILIARY ADAS YEREIM$800
KEREN YAGDIL TORAH$700
LAMDEINI$500
Individual grant recipient$360
FRIENDS OF BAS AYIN$180
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY21–21, $12k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%TZADUKAS HUIR: $12k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

43%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$56k · 5 repeat orgs$75k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2019, 1 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call). Read against FY2019, 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

5
11

Total granted

$56k
$43k

Still filing today

20%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21
PhilanthropyHuman ServicesReligionOther

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

  • UO
    UTA OF KJ
    2× · 2018–2019 · $35k
  • CR
    CONG RAV TIV YETEV LEV
    2× · 2018–2020 · $13k
  • TT
    TALMUD TORAH BRESLOV INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $5k · revenue +159%

Funded once

  • UT
    UNITED TALMUDICAL ACADEMY
    one grant, 2018 · $27k
  • CC
    CONG CHASDEI YITZCHOK
    one grant, 2018 · $10k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $2k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
04the grantee network

5 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 5 of the 26 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
5/5
Grantees still filing
5/5
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

UTA OF KJ — $34,520 · OtherUTA OF KJUNITED TALMUDICAL ACADEMY — $26,800 · OtherUNITED TALMUDICAL ACADEMYCONG RAV TIV YETEV LEV — $13,185 · OtherCONG RAV TIV YETEV LEVCONG CHASDEI YITZCHOK — $10,000 · OtherCONG CHASDEI YITZCHOKVAYOEL MOSHE CORP — $9,000 · OtherVAYOEL MOSHE CORP+16 more — $17,328 · Other+16 moreTZEDUKAS HUIR INC — $12,086 · Human ServicesTZEDUKAS …THE OJC FUND — $8,300 · EducationTALMUD TORAH BRESLOV INC — $4,860 · ReligionYETEV LEV INC — $3,600 · PhilanthropyFRIENDS OF BAS AYIN — $180 · Philanthropy
Other$110,833Human Services$12,086Education$8,300Religion$4,860Philanthropy$3,780

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTHE OJC FUND — $8,300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTALMUD TORAH BRESLOV INC — $4,860 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetFRIENDS OF BAS AYIN — $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

  • Who funds TZEDUKAS HUIR INC
  • Who funds THE OJC FUND
  • Who funds TALMUD TORAH BRESLOV INC
  • Who funds YETEV LEV INC
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF BAS AYIN

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.

The Ojc FundNY16.6× affinity6 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Rovna Ct Foundation · Madanim Foundation · Zelig and Rifky Weiss Family Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 My Charity Foundation 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your 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
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 26 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record but names no grant recipient in the published copy, so the figures above are from FY2019, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph