Skip to content
Rhino Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Rhino Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$188k
Granted FY2024still arriving
23
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2024.

Religion$1.2MHealth$111kPhilanthropy$98kHuman Services$56kEducation$38kInternational$9kYouth Development$5kArts & Culture$3kOther$0
02FY2024 · 23 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k15 grants · $57k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $130k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$34k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHEVRAT PINTO$25,000
THE HEBRON FUND$20,000
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MERKAZ HACHINUCH HABEER INC$20,000
KEREN MENACHEM$16,800
Individual grant recipient$15,000
PODEH UMATZEL INC$13,600
KEHILLAS BEIS YEHUDAH$10,000
CONG ZICHRON MENACHEM$10,000
BELEV ECHAD INC$7,200
CONGREGATION SHEARITH ISRAEL$5,000
CONGREGATION YESHIVAS MEON HATORAH INC$5,000
YESHIVAT NOAM$5,000
ALWAYS OUR KIDS$5,000
CONGREGATION OHAB ZEDEK OZ$5,000
YAVNEH ACADEMY$5,000
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 (FY19–24, $55k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%BEIRT MEIR INC: $10k → 15%ISRAEL MEDICAL FUND: $1k → 17%AHAVAS OYLAM INC: $2k → 11%BELEV ECHAD INC: $10k → 17%BELEV ECHAD INC: $7k → 17%BELEV ECHAD INC: $5k → 17%BONEI OLAM: $5k → 20%BONEI OLAM: $5k → 20%BONEI OLAM: $5k → 20%BONEI OLAM: $5k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
NY
NV
OH
PA
NJ
CA
NC
FL
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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 26 repeat orgs$356k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +104% since the first grant, against +95% for those funded once.

26 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2024, 14 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
41

Total granted

$1.1M
$305k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+104%
+95%

Still filing today

38%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $51k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesReligionHealthEducationPhilanthropyFood & NutritionOther
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

  • AF
    American Friends of Merkaz Hachinuch Habeer Inc
    6× · 2019–2024 · $145k · revenue +178%
  • HF
    HEBRON FUND INC
    5× · 2018–2024 · $98k · revenue +104%
  • YO
    YESHIVAS OHR V'DAAS
    6× · 2018–2023 · $87k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • AM
    AFO MERCAZ HACHINUCH HABEER
    one grant, 2018 · $93k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $25k
  • CS
    CHABAD SERVING ELON AND SURROUNDINGS INC
    one grant, 2022 · $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

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
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
2
Ohr Olam Corp

publish religious books

Religion
3
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
4
Ohel Yakov Foundation
—
5
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Hayashar Vehatov Inc

The furtherance of primacy of orthodox jewish jurisprudence

Religion
7
Ohr Yisrael Yeshiva Inc

Ohr Yisrael is a religious institution that provides religious services and instruction to Rabbis and community members.

Religion
8
Sherit Isroel
—
9
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
10
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
11
American Friends of Amshinover Yeshiva Jerusalem Inc

Support of religious schools in Israel

International
12
Gemilas Chesed Kramer Inc
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Yeshivat Noam; the most unlike its peers is GO2 for Lung Cancer. 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

22 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. 22 of the 78 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/22
Grantees still filing
15/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHEVRAT PINTO: $239,200 · OtherCHEVRAT PINTOAmerican Friends of Merkaz Hachinuch Habeer Inc: $145,000 · OtherAmerican Friends of Merkaz Hachinuch Habeer IncAFO MERCAZ HACHINUCH HABEER: $93,000 · OtherAFO MERCAZ HACHINUCH HABEERIndividual grant recipient: $60,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientKBY: $59,500 · OtherKBYKOLLEL ZICHRON ELIYAHU: $43,600 · Other+57 more: $430,268 · Other+57 moreYESHIVAS OHR V'DAAS: $87,000 · ReligionYESHIVAS OHR V'…PODEH UMATZEL INC: $76,100 · ReligionPODEH UMATZEL I…TALMUD TORAH BRESLOV INC: $25,000 · ReligionTALMUD TORAH BR…American Friends of Chabad of Thailand Inc: $15,000 · ReligionAmerican Friend…HEBRON FUND INC: $98,000 · PhilanthropyBELEV ECHAD INC: $21,800 · Human ServicesBonei Olam Inc: $20,000 · Human ServicesBEIT MEIR INC: $10,000 · Human Services+2 more: $2,800 · Human ServicesCHAI LIFELINE INC: $45,200 · HealthGO2 For Lung Cancer: $5,000 · HealthOZER OLAM INC: $20,000 · EducationYESHIVAT NOAM: $5,000 · EducationALWAYS OUR KIDS INC: $5,000 · Youth Development
Other$1,070,568Religion$203,100Philanthropy$98,000Human Services$54,600Health$50,200Education$25,000Youth Development$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAmerican Friends of Merkaz Hachinuch Habeer Inc: $145,000 over 6y, 7.1% of budgetHEBRON FUND INC: $98,000 over 5y, 1.5% of budgetYESHIVAS OHR V'DAAS: $87,000 over 6y, 1.1% of budgetPODEH UMATZEL INC: $76,100 over 5y, 4.8% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $45,200 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetTALMUD TORAH BRESLOV INC: $25,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetBELEV ECHAD INC: $21,800 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetBonei Olam Inc: $20,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetOZER OLAM INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetAmerican Friends of Chabad of Thailand Inc: $15,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetBEIT MEIR INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetYAD YISROEL: $7,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetYESHIVAT NOAM: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGO2 For Lung Cancer: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetALWAYS OUR KIDS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetReb Shayalas Kitchen: $3,600 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetALGEMEINER INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetYESHIVA TIFERES TORAH INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAHAVAS OYLOM INC: $1,800 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetWorldwide Friends Foundation: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetISRAEL MEDICAL FUND CORP: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTEANECK VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE CORPS: $750 over 1y, 0.2% 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 American Friends of Merkaz Hachinuch Habeer Inc ↗
  • Who funds HEBRON FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVAS OHR V'DAAS ↗
  • Who funds PODEH UMATZEL INC ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗
  • Who funds TALMUD TORAH BRESLOV INC ↗
  • Who funds BELEV ECHAD INC ↗
  • Who funds Bonei Olam Inc ↗
  • Who funds OZER OLAM INC ↗
  • Who funds American Friends of Chabad of Thailand Inc ↗
  • Who funds BEIT MEIR INC ↗
  • Who funds YAD YISROEL ↗

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 FundJewish Communal FundJewish Federation of …Jack Adjmi Family Fou…Cross River Community…George and Ellen Frie…David & Chaya Zahler …Bzl FoundationYr Foundation TrustMurray & Sydell Rosen…Eisenberg Family Foun…The Basch Family Foun…
The Ojc FundNY38× affinity22 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · Jewish Federation of Cleveland · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Cross River Community Foundation · George and Ellen Friedman Family Foundation · David & Chaya Zahler Foundation Inc · Bzl Foundation · Yr Foundation Trust · Murray & Sydell Rosenberg Foundationinc · Eisenberg Family Foundation Inc · The Basch 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 Rhino Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rhino Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →median 3%
  • Yeshiva Tiferes Torah Inc: 3% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
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 78 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Rhino’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