Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Peylim Lev Lachim

Peylim Lev LAchim is the umbrella for an array of Jewish, Torah based programs including worship, lectures and financial support for US and Israeli institutions involved in education and outreach.

$4.6M
Granted FY2024still arriving
17
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$35k
Largest
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 FY20172024.

Education$1.5MReligion$390kRecreation & Sports$9kInternational$6k
02FY2024 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 17 grants below total $206,100 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $4,620,873 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $4,414,773 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 $10k9 grants · $58k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $148k
$7,800
Median grant
2
States reached
$160k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MANHATTAN HIGH SCHOOL$35,000
YESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD$24,000
CONG KEREN HAGEMACH$21,600
Cong Kahal Chasidy Chernobyl$18,300
LAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL$17,500
YESHIVA OHR HATORAH$11,000
YESHIVA TIFERES YISROEL$10,500
TALMUDIC RESEARCH CENTER$10,000
BETH MEDRASH GOVOHA$7,800
YESHIVAS EITZ CHAYIM$7,400
BAIS YAAKOV HIGH SCHOOL$7,000
MESIVTA OF LONG BEACH$6,000
BAIS REUVEN KAMENETZ$6,000
CONG MEOROS NOSSON$6,000
MESIVTA OHR OLAM$6,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 95% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%YESHIVA ZICHRON PALTIEL: $14k → 11%YESHIVA TIFERES YISROEL: $40k → 14%MANHATTAN HIGH SCHOOL: $35k → 17%ZICHRON YOSEF: $30k → 20%YESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD: $42k → 11%Cong Kahal Chasidy Chernobyl: $36k → 6%YESHIVA TIFERES YISROEL: $26k → 14%ZICHRON YOSEF: $28k → 20%YESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD: $42k → 11%Cong Kahal Chasidy Chernobyl: $18k → 6%YESHIVA TIFERES YISROEL: $24k → 14%CONG TIFERES ZION OF VYELIPOL: $17k → 20%YESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD: $38k → 11%Cong Kahal Chasidy Chernobyl: $16k → 6%YESHIVA TIFERES YISROEL: $23k → 14%CONG TIFERES ZION OF VYELIPOL: $17k → 20%YESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD: $36k → 11%Cong Kahal Chasidy Chernobyl: $13k → 6%ZICHRON YOSEF: $15k → 20%YESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD: $33k → 11%YESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD: $24k → 11%YESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD: $22k → 11%BNOS BROCHA INC: $20k → 11%LAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL: $18k → 11%EIN OD MILVADO: $13k → 11%EDUCATIONAL ENDOWMENT FUND: $13k → 11%KHILAH MARINE PARK: $12k → 20%EDUCATIONAL ENDOWMENT FUND: $12k → 11%KHILAH MARINE PARK: $12k → 20%CONG ZICHRON BINYAMIN: $12k → 11%EDUCATIONAL ENDOWMENT FUND: $12k → 11%CONG ZICHRON BINYAMIN: $12k → 11%YESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD: $12k → 11%EDUCATIONAL ENDOWMENT FUND: $12k → 11%CONG ZICHRON BINYAMIN: $12k → 11%PDUYIM LZION: $25k → 20%YESHIVA JESODE HATORAH: $15k → 20%BNOS ZION OF BOBOV INC: $14k → 20%CONG BAIS KOSOV: $14k → 20%CONG KEREN HAGEMACH: $22k → 20%CONG KEREN HAGEMACH: $21k → 20%Yeshiva Imrei Bina Inc: $13k → 20%CONG CHIZUK HATORAH: $103k → 20%CONG CHIZUK HATORAH: $88k → 20%CONG CHIZUK HATORAH: $77k → 20%CONG CHIZUK HATORAH: $69k → 20%CONG CHIZUK HATORAH: $60k → 20%Revach VHatzala: $28k → 20%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.

Grants abroad, by region — $4.4M 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$4.4M · 100% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: SUPPORT OF SERVICES

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.

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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.6M · 23 repeat orgs$262k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +49% since the first grant, against +8% for the ones you funded once.

23 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2024, 13 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

23
16

Total granted

$1.6M
$188k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+49%
+8%

Still filing today

26%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 64% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $73k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationReligionRecreation & SportsInternationalOther

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

  • YS
    YESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD
    8× · 2017–2024 · $249k · revenue +198%
  • YO
    YESHIVAS OHR HATORAH INC
    7× · 2017–2024 · $57k · revenue +157%
  • LC
    LAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC
    5× · 2019–2024 · $49k · revenue +49%

Funded once

  • RV
    REVACH VIHATZOLOH
    one grant, 2017 · $28k
  • CK
    CONG KEREN HACHESED OF ADATH ARON V ISRAEL
    one grant, 2017 · $25k
  • BB
    BNOS BRACHA INC
    one grant, 2018 · $20k · revenue +6%

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

04Your field

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.

1
Yeshivat Or Hachaim of Lakewood Inc

Parochial elementary school with a focus on sephardic tradition.

Education
2
Yeshiva Toras Chaim of Greater Miami Inc

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

Education
3
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
4
Yeshiva Toras Chaim Inc

The organization operates a religious/parochial high school and college in lakewood, nj.

Unclassified
5
Yeshivat Yagdil Torah Inc

Providing jewish and secular education for elementary school aged children.

Education
6
Yeshiva Bais Mordechai of Teaneck

To provide religious Jewish education.

Education
7
Yeshiva Ohr Yehuda Inc

Providing religious and secular education for elementary school aged children.

Education
8
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
9
Yeshiva Nesivos Hatorah Inc

Providing jewish and secular education for elementary school aged children.

Education
10
Bais Yaakov Girls High School of Minneapolis

Providing jewish and secular education for high school aged girls.

Education
11
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
12
Yeshiva Zichron Mayir

Educating students in jewish religious studies and prayers.

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Yeshiva Shaar Hatalmud and the most unlike its peers is Camp Dora Golding. 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 27 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number23%2%<5yr17%0%5–10yr21%29%10–20yr22%43%20–35yr13%19%35–55yr5%7%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value23%14%<5yr17%0%5–10yr21%11%10–20yr22%51%20–35yr13%17%35–55yr5%7%55yr+

The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 14% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 2% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
2%1/45
the rest of the field
11%
2,191/19,824

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.

04the grantee network

16 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. 16 of the 47 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
11/16
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

CHIZUK HATORAH INC — $397,800 · OtherCHIZUK HATORAH INCCONGREGATION KEHAL CHASIDY CHERNOBEL — $83,500 · OtherCONGREGATION KEHAL CHASIDY CHERNOBELCONGREGATION TIFERES ZION OF VYELIPOL INC — $76,850 · OtherCONGREGATION TIFERES ZION OF VYELIPOL INCCONGREGATION ZICHRON YOSEF — $72,500 · OtherCONGREGATION ZICHRON YOSEFBETH MEDRASH GOVOHA OF AMERICA — $71,000 · OtherBETH MEDRASH GOVOHA OF AMERICACONGREGATION ZICHRONE BINYAMIN — $67,000 · OtherCONGREGATION ZICHRONE BINYAMINCONGREGATION KEREN HAGEMACH — $42,100 · Other+24 more — $408,094 · Other+24 moreYESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD — $248,500 · EducationYESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUDYeshiva Tiferes Yisroel — $149,707 · EducationYeshiva Tiferes YisroelEDUCATIONAL ENDOWMENT FUND INC — $84,000 · EducationEDUCATIONAL ENDOWMENT FUND INCYESHIVAS OHR HATORAH INC — $56,900 · EducationYESHIVAS OHR HATORAH INCLAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC — $48,958 · EducationLAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC+6 more — $69,000 · Education+6 moreYESHIVAS NER MOSHE ASSOCIATION INC — $15,000 · ReligionYESHIVA IMREI BINA INC — $13,000 · ReligionOHR NAAVA — $6,100 · ReligionCAMP DORA GOLDING — $8,500 · Recreation & SportsAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA DMIR INC — $6,000 · International
Other$1,218,844Education$657,065Religion$34,100Recreation & Sports$8,500International$6,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetYESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD — $248,500 over 8y, 1.6% of budgetYeshiva Tiferes Yisroel — $149,707 over 8y, 0.5% of budgetEDUCATIONAL ENDOWMENT FUND INC — $84,000 over 7y, 0.9% of budgetYESHIVAS OHR HATORAH INC — $56,900 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetLAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC — $48,958 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetBNOS BRACHA INC — $20,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetTALMUDIC RESEARCH CENTER OF NORTHERN NEW JERSEY — $20,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetYESHIVAS NER MOSHE ASSOCIATION INC — $15,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetYESHIVA IMREI BINA INC — $13,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetYESHIVA GEDOLAH OF WOODLAKE VILLAGE — $9,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCAMP DORA GOLDING — $8,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBais Yaakov High School of Lakewood Inc — $7,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCONGREGATION BNOS YAAKOV INC — $7,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetOHR NAAVA — $6,100 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA DMIR INC — $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBAIS REUVEN KAMENETZ OF LAKEWOOD — $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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 YESHIVA SHAAR HATALMUD
  • Who funds Yeshiva Tiferes Yisroel
  • Who funds EDUCATIONAL ENDOWMENT FUND INC
  • Who funds YESHIVAS OHR HATORAH INC
  • Who funds LAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC
  • Who funds BNOS BRACHA INC
  • Who funds TALMUDIC RESEARCH CENTER OF NORTHERN NEW JERSEY
  • Who funds YESHIVAS NER MOSHE ASSOCIATION INC
  • Who funds YESHIVA IMREI BINA INC
  • Who funds YESHIVA GEDOLAH OF WOODLAKE VILLAGE
  • Who funds CAMP DORA GOLDING
  • Who funds Bais Yaakov High School of Lakewood Inc
  • Who funds CONGREGATION BNOS YAAKOV INC
  • Who funds OHR NAAVA

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 FundNY54.6× affinity35 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Jewish Communal Fund · Donors Fund Inc · National Society for Hebrew Day Schools · Regina Goldwasser Foundation · Toras Chesed Inc · Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore · Tifferet Moshe Inc · Lakewood Cheder School Inc · Eisenberg Family Foundation Inc · Maalot

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 Peylim Lev Lachim 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 50%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 9%
  • Yeshivas Ohr Hatorah Inc28% of income from government
  • Bnos Bracha Inc9% of income from government
  • Yeshiva Shaar Hatalmud6% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Peylim Lev Lachim?

Find your warmest path to Peylim Lev Lachim 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 47 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph