Skip to content
Ten Bracha Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Ten Bracha Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$89k
Granted FY2024still arriving
21
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$31k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Religion$373kInternational$41kHuman Services$33kEducation$29kPhilanthropy$12kHealth$7kArts & Culture$980Public Benefit$500Other$0
02FY2024 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k17 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $79k
$500
Median grant
6
States reached
$419k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHICAGO COMMUNITY KOLLEL$30,636
KUPAH SHEL TZEDAKAH ON SOREK$20,000
NEEDY FAMILY$16,500
JGIVE FRIENDS F ASOR FUND USA$12,000
Individual grant recipient$3,000
KEREN ESTHER MALKA FOUNDATION$2,000
YESHIVA DEGEL HATORAH$1,000
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF TARAS MISPACHA$980
THE CHESED FUND$758
AMERICAN GEERZ FOR LIFE$500
CONGREGATION TZAMRA INC$500
CHABAD YOUNG PROFESSIONALS$500
Individual grant recipient$190
KEREN OHR$180
THE SECOND SEDAR KOLLEL$100
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.

US giving: 86% of grant dollars ($427k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 14% that went abroad ($70k) is mapped below.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY21–22, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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%YAD CHAYA: $1k → 14%KEREN HATZEDAKA: $200 → 11%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.

Beyond the US: 14% of all-years giving ($70k)

2 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Israel$67k · 14 grants
Kenya$3k · 1 grant
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

49%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$237k · 10 repeat orgs$250k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 17 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
32

Total granted

$237k
$178k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+7%
+12%

Still filing today

40%
28%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 20% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $71k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
PhilanthropyReligionInternationalEducationHuman ServicesPublic BenefitOther
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

  • BT
    BNEI TORAH MOVEMENT
    2× · 2022–2023 · $110k
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA DMIR INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $36k · revenue +7%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF RAMAT BET SHEMESH INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $35k · revenue +45%

Funded once

  • YA
    YESHIVAT ATERET YISREAL INC
    one grant, 2022 · $50k
  • CA
    CONGREGATION AVODAH BRURAH
    one grant, 2022 · $36k
  • BE
    BEIS ELIYAHU INC
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue -8%
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
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
3
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
4
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
5
Tal Hashamayim Foundation
Religion
6
Tzemach Yifroch Foundation
—
7
Talmud Torah Tzfat Inc

We make grants to support orthodox jewish education.

Religion
8
American Friends of Torat Eliyahu
Philanthropy
9
Sherit Isroel
—
10
American Friends of Hamesorah Talmud Torah Inc

Charity and education in u.s. and israel

—
11
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
12
Zichron Moshe Elihu Tzedoka Fund
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 Beitar Illit Advanced Talmud Project. 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

18 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. 18 of the 60 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)
17/18
Grantees still filing
12/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BNEI TORAH MOVEMENT: $110,000 · OtherBNEI TORAH MOVEMENTYESHIVAT ATERET YISREAL INC: $50,000 · OtherYESHIVAT ATERET YISREAL INCCONGREGATION AVODAH BRURAH: $36,000 · OtherCONGREGATION AVODAH BRURAHNEEDY FAMILY: $31,500 · OtherNEEDY FAMILYCHICAGO COMMUNITY KOLLEL INC: $30,636 · OtherCHICAGO COMMUNITY KOLLEL INCCONGREGATION MOSDOS TOLDOS AHARON: $25,000 · OtherCONGREGATION MOSDOS TOLDOS AHARONKUPAH SHEL TZEDAKAH ON SOREK: $20,000 · OtherKUPAH SHEL TZEDAKAH ON SOREKJGIVE FRIENDS F ASOR FUND USA: $12,000 · Other+34 more: $38,013 · Other+34 moreAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA DMIR INC: $35,800 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS …AMERICAN FRIENDS OF RAMAT BET SHEMESH INC: $34,750 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS …TORAH COMMUNITY FUND INC: $5,000 · InternationalTORAH COMMUNITY F…BEIS ELIYAHU INC: $25,134 · EducationTHE OJC FUND: $10,000 · Education+1 more: $100 · EducationBEITAR ILLIT ADVANCED TALMUD PROJECT: $13,500 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN FRIENDS OF TZIR HEMED: $6,600 · PhilanthropyNECHAMAS ZION MARYLAND: $5,550 · PhilanthropyKEREN ESTHER MALKA FOUNDATION: $2,000 · PhilanthropyTIFERES YISROEL INC: $2,000 · PhilanthropyYAD CHAYA INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesKEREN HATZEDAKA INC: $200 · Human ServicesOHR TORAH INC: $511 · ReligionAMERICAN FRIENDS OF KUPAT HA'IR: $56 · ReligionTOMCHEI TZEDAKA CORP: $36 · ReligionVYAZREIM INC: $500 · Public BenefitAMERICAN GEERZ FOR LIFE INC: $500 · Youth Development
Other$353,149International$75,550Education$35,234Philanthropy$29,650Human Services$1,200Religion$603Public Benefit$500Youth Development$500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA DMIR INC: $35,800 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF RAMAT BET SHEMESH INC: $34,750 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetBEIS ELIYAHU INC: $25,134 over 1y, 8.5% of budgetBEITAR ILLIT ADVANCED TALMUD PROJECT: $13,500 over 2y, 6.6% of budgetTHE OJC FUND: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF TZIR HEMED: $6,600 over 2y, 9.4% of budgetNECHAMAS ZION MARYLAND: $5,550 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetTORAH COMMUNITY FUND INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetKEREN ESTHER MALKA FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 1y, 7.0% of budgetTIFERES YISROEL INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetYAD CHAYA INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOHR TORAH INC: $511 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetVYAZREIM INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN GEERZ FOR LIFE INC: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetKEREN HATZEDAKA INC: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVAS OHR HATORAH INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF KUPAT HA'IR: $56 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTOMCHEI TZEDAKA CORP: $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 AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVA DMIR INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF RAMAT BET SHEMESH INC ↗
  • Who funds BEIS ELIYAHU INC ↗
  • Who funds BEITAR ILLIT ADVANCED TALMUD PROJECT ↗
  • Who funds THE OJC FUND ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF TZIR HEMED ↗
  • Who funds NECHAMAS ZION MARYLAND ↗
  • Who funds TORAH COMMUNITY FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds KEREN ESTHER MALKA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds TIFERES YISROEL INC ↗
  • Who funds YAD CHAYA INC ↗
  • Who funds OHR TORAH INC ↗
  • Who funds VYAZREIM INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN GEERZ FOR LIFE 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 FundJewish Communal FundJack Adjmi Family Fou…Alyad Foundation IncMars FoundationThe Yale Fishman Fami…Astar Foundation IncRegina Goldwasser Fou…The Jmg FoundationThe Weiskopf Family F…The Dennis Berman Fam…Donors Fund Inc
The Ojc FundNY36.6× affinity20 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 · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Alyad Foundation Inc · Mars Foundation · The Yale Fishman Family Foundation · Astar Foundation Inc · Regina Goldwasser Foundation · The Jmg Foundation · The Weiskopf Family Foundation · The Dennis Berman Family Foundation Inc · Donors Fund Inc

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 Ten Bracha Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ten Bracha Inc. 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%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 28%
  • Yeshivas Ohr Hatorah Inc: 28% of income from government
  • Tiferes Yisroel Inc: 5% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Ten Bracha Inc?

Find your warmest path to Ten Bracha Inc 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 60 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 Ten Bracha’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