· Public charity
Ohr Yosef Inc
To help disadvantaged children, widows and orphans by providing food, clothing, supplies and grants to charitable tax exempt organizations.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 2 grants below total $576,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $3,518,800 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $2,942,800 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 · FY2023
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
- $250k+1 grant · $566k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CHASDEI YITZCHOK | $566,000 |
| AMERICAN FRIENDS KIRYAT CHINUCH LAB | $10,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 96% of your 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.
Grants abroad, by region — $2.9M on the FY2023 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.
Stated purpose: GRANTS TO INDIGENT
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. 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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +144% since the first grant, against -1% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2023, 5 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (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 FY2023, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $576k 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
- KHKEREN HAYESHIVOT TRUST3× · 2020–2022 · $324k · revenue +144%
- YDYAD DAVID INC3× · 2020–2022 · $52k · revenue +162%
- LALMAHN ACHAI INC2× · 2020–2022 · $46k · revenue +156%
Funded once
- ACAMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INCone grant, 2022 · $100k · revenue -1%
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF HEBRON YESHIVA IN JERUSALEM INCone grant, 2022 · $68k · revenue -16%
- TRTIFERET RABBI AKIVAgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $46k · revenue +80%
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.
Support of religious schools in Israel
The organization will provide financial assistance to educational institutions that promote the observance of the jewish religion, its laws and traditions, and sacred texts, including yeshivat nachalat yossef, located in jerusalem, israel.
None
To award scholarships and grants to students from the United States attending Yeshivas Gedolah Matisyahu in the State of Israel
The funding of heichal yerushalayim yeshiva(religious shcool) to facilitate and promote judaic studies.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Friends of Sucath David Inc and the most unlike its peers is American Friends of Binyan-Av Foundation. 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 26 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 11% 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.
20 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. 20 of the 27 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.
- Who funds KEREN HAYESHIVOT TRUST ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF HEBRON YESHIVA IN JERUSALEM INC ↗
- Who funds YAD DAVID INC ↗
- Who funds LMAHN ACHAI INC ↗
- Who funds TIFERET RABBI AKIVA ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF SUCATH DAVID INC ↗
- Who funds American Friends of The Rabbinical College Kol Torah Inc ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC ↗
- Who funds MOSDOT BETH YAAKOV ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BINYAN-AV FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DAAS MEISHARIM ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF SHEVACH INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF-OR-ISRAEL CHARITABLE TRUST ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF KIRYAT CHINUCH LABONIM INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YEKERAI YERUSHALAIM ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF SHEARIM HAMETSUYANIMINC ↗
- Who funds YESHIVA BUILDING FUND INC ↗
- Who funds TOMCHEI TZEDAKA CORP ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SANZ INSTITUTIONS IN ISRAEL INC ↗
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: Jewish Communal Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · The Jimmy and Berta Khezrie Charitable Foundation · The Foop Foundation · The Adjmi-Dwek Foundation Inc · Marbeh Shalom Foundation Inc · The Eddie and Rachelle Betesh Family Foundation · The Amin and Lillian Adjmi Foundation · Chehebar Family Foundation · The Ralph S Gindi Family Foundation · Joseph Chehebar Family Foundation · The Ojc 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 Ohr Yosef 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.