· Private foundation
The Iro Foundation Trust
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
100% of The Iro Foundation Trust’s FY2025 grant dollars went to The Donors Fund, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2021, the last year The Iro Foundation Trust named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $160k. 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 2025.
Where the money goes
Grants by size, and the largest recipients.
By grant size · FY2021
- Under $10k17 grants · $18k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $23k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $119k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $69,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $50,000 |
| THE DONORS FUND | $13,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $3,500 |
| CONG BEER MAYIM | $3,000 |
| ZICHRON SHLOMO | $2,400 |
| TOV VCHESED | $2,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,800 |
| CONG TEFILA LDOVID | $1,800 |
| BAIS BROCHO | $1,200 |
| Individual grant recipient | $700 |
| MESIVTA EITZ CHAIM | $550 |
| KEHILLAS NEW CENTRAL | $500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $250 |
Does the money reach high-need areas?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.
Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 86% of its 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.
17 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2021, 8 since wound down; 21 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call). Read against FY2021, 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
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
How this is measured
Backed again, and grew
- IGIndividual grant recipient5× · 2017–2022 · $204k
- MEMESIVTA EITZ CHAIM5× · 2018–2022 · $191k
- IGIndividual grant recipient4× · 2017–2022 · $72k
Funded once
- KZKEDUSHAT ZIONone grant, 2017 · $40k
- UBUNITED BOBOV INTERNATIONAL INCone grant, 2020 · $20k
- MGMACHNE GILAone grant, 2017 · $17k
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.
1 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. 1 of the 51 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 · B&M Steinmetz Foundation · Mazal Charitable Trust · S&W Foundation Inc · C&Y Lipschitz Family Foundation · Kmh Inl Abraham and Sara Foundation Inc · The Jacob Kempler Charitable Foundation Inc · Park Charitable Trust · The Etz Chaim Charitable Trust · Birkas Rosh Foundation Inc · Chavie Stern Family Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
How this is measured
How much its grantees rely on government
Each dot is one organization The Iro Foundation Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Iro Foundation Trust. Bigger dots raise more.
How this is measured
Play a game based on Iro’s filings →