Skip to content

· Private foundation

R & R Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$1.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$1.0M
Largest
01What it funds
0176% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Religion$1.7MArts & Culture$151kHuman Services$1kHealth$790International$200Philanthropy$100Food & Nutrition$50Youth Development$36Other$0
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $4k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $224k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.0M
$15,220
Median grant
2
States reached
$5.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MIKVAH YISROEL$1,000,000
CONG YESOD AVODAH$47,300
CONG RAV LEHOSHIA INC$40,000
CONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INC$39,000
TOV LKOL$37,100
Individual grant recipient$23,652
YESHIVA INSTITUTE DIVREI SHMUEL INC$15,220
CONGREGATION TIFERETH ISRAEL$12,000
CONG SDEI YAKOV INC$10,000
CONGREGATION SHAAREI TEFILLAH$2,000
FRIENDS OF TYY SQUARE JERUSALEM$600
CONGREGATION SHALHEVES OF KJ$500
KEREN HATZEDAKA$500
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 (FY23–25, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 97% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%DAVIS MEMORIAL FUND: $36 → 6%KEREN HATZEDAKA: $500 → 11%KEREN HATZEDAKA: $500 → 11%KIMPATORIN AID: $36 → 20%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.
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

24%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$485k · 15 repeat orgs$1.5M to everyone else

15 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
90

Total granted

$485k
$496k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+6%

Still filing today

7%
12%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 15% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.0M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’23’24’25
ReligionHuman ServicesHealthPhilanthropyInternationalArts & CultureOther
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× · 2017–2025 · $112k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    2× · 2023–2025 · $70k
  • CY
    CONG YESOD AVODAH
    2× · 2024–2025 · $63k

Funded once

  • GY
    GERRER YESHIVA MESIFTA BAIS YISROEL
    one grant, 2023 · $206k
  • CA
    Community Access Television Inc
    one grant, 2024 · $151k · revenue +2%
  • TY
    TIFERES YISROEL
    one grant, 2024 · $22k
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

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
2
The Keren Rachaim Fund
—
3
Gemilas Chesed Kramer Inc
Philanthropy
4
Avodat Avraham Inc
Religion
5
Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
7
Keren Avraham Shmuel Inc Wachman
Philanthropy
8
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
9
Hahaim Yeshivat Shalom Inc
Education
10
Tal Hashamayim Foundation
Religion
11
Chabad Lametayel Inc

encourage and facilitate the observance of traditional orthodox Jewish practices around the world.

—
12
Shaarei Halacha Inc
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Friends of Kupat Ha'ir; the most unlike its peers is Eom - Freund Family Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

15 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 110 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/15
Grantees still filing
10/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MIKVAH YISROEL: $1,000,000 · OtherMIKVAH YISROELGERRER YESHIVA MESIFTA BAIS YISROEL: $206,415 · OtherGERRER YESHIVA MESIFTA BAIS YISROELCONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INC: $112,048 · OtherCONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INCIndividual grant recipient: $70,092 · OtherCONG YESOD AVODAH: $63,200 · OtherTOV LKOL: $62,300 · Other+90 more: $316,108 · Other+90 moreCommunity Access Television Inc: $151,110 · Arts & CultureCongregation Rav Lehoshia Inc: $40,000 · Religion+4 more: $326 · ReligionKEREN HATZEDAKA INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesDAVIS MEMORIAL FUND INC: $36 · Human ServicesKIMPATORIN AID INC: $36 · Human ServicesCHAI LIFELINE INC: $700 · HealthFRIENDS OF YAD SARAH INC: $90 · HealthKEREN ZICHRON DOV INC: $300 · PhilanthropyEOM - FREUND FAMILY FOUNDATION: $100 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA DMIR INC: $50 · International
Other$1,830,163Arts & Culture$151,110Religion$40,326Human Services$1,072Health$790Philanthropy$400International$50

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

25%50%75%100%$10k$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCommunity Access Television Inc: $151,110 over 1y, 25% of budgetKEREN HATZEDAKA INC: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $700 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKEREN ZICHRON DOV INC: $300 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF KUPAT HA'IR: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF YAD SARAH INC: $90 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNoam Shabbos Inc: $54 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA DMIR INC: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDAVIS MEMORIAL FUND INC: $36 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetARACHIM INC: $36 over 1y, 14% of budgetBEER HAGOLAH INSTITUTES INC: $36 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKIMPATORIN AID INC: $36 over 1y, 0.0% 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 Community Access Television Inc ↗
  • Who funds Congregation Rav Lehoshia Inc ↗
  • Who funds KEREN HATZEDAKA INC ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗

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 FundNY53.8× affinity35 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · Moses and Miriam Vogel Charitable Foundation Tr · The Basch Family Foundation · Zichron Simcha Dsassov · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · The Jimmy and Berta Khezrie Charitable Foundation · Gertrude and Morris Bienenfeld Charitable Foundation · Ani Mamin Foundation · Marbeh Shalom Foundation Inc · The Ohr Yitzchok Family Foundation

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 R & R Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from R & R Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%6%14%25%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
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.

    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 110 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on R & R Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph