· Private foundation
Rockstone
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.
Read this first · the figures below need context
88% of Rockstone’s FY2023 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. FY2023 names 1 organization directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2022, the last year Rockstone named its own grantees at scale: 10 organizations, $59k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What it funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.
Where the money goes
Grants by size, and the largest recipients.
By grant size · FY2022
- Under $10k15 grants · $49k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| TZIDKAS ERETZ HAKODESH | $10,085 |
| CONG TALMUD TORAH D CHASIDEI BOBOV | $9,000 |
| KEREN YAD VEIZER INC | $6,500 |
| YESHIVA BETH JOSEPH | $5,000 |
| YESHIVA U MESIVTA V YOEL MOSHE | $5,000 |
| ICHID HATORAH VHACHESED | $5,000 |
| KHAL TORATH CHAIM OF ROCKLAND | $2,800 |
| CONG EZER YESHIVA | $2,500 |
| CONG AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INC | $2,500 |
| THE OJC FUND | $2,100 |
| ZICHRON MENACHEM INC | $2,000 |
| CONG HACHZUKAS TALMUD INC | $1,750 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,500 |
| WE LOVE TO HELP INC | $1,300 |
| CONG ZIEV HATORAH OF MONSEY | $1,300 |
Does the money reach high-need areas?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.
Its human-services grants (FY20–22, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 95% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
How this is measured
How this is measured
Who it funds again
Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.
Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +77% since the first grant, against +14% for those funded once.
30 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2022, 21 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call). Read against FY2022, 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
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; $721 went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
How this is measured
Backed again, and grew
- KYKEREN YAD V'EIZER INC4× · 2018–2022 · $122k · revenue -4%
- CTCONG TALMUD TORAH D CHASIDEI BOBOV5× · 2017–2022 · $69k
- C3CONG 3PRI HOORETZ3× · 2017–2021 · $31k
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2017 · $26k
- CZCONG ZICHRON REB MORDECHAIone grant, 2021 · $10k
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF OSEH CHAYILone grant, 2021 · $6k · revenue -55%
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.
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.
Religious Teaching
How this is measured
30 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. 30 of the 158 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.
Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee
Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing
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.
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.
Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Zichron Simcha Dsassov · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · American Friends of Bnai Levy Foundation · Donors Fund Inc · Moshe Eichler Fund Inc · The Lexicon Foundation Inc · Mkz Charity Foundation Inc · Ani Mamin Foundation · Mk Charity Foundation Inc · Igcf Inc · S&E Foundation
How this is measured
How much its grantees rely on government
Each dot is one organization Rockstone funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rockstone. Bigger dots raise more.
How this is measured
Play a game based on Rockstone’s filings →