Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Jobarr Foundation Inc

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.

$50k
Granted FY2025still arriving
22
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$9k
Largest
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Religion$160kEducation$31kHealth$25kInternational$6kHuman Services$4kPublic Safety & Disaster$3kFood & Nutrition$2kAnimals$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 22 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,010
Median grant
4
States reached
$169k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
YOUNG ISRAEL OF GREAT NECK$8,938
AMERICAN COMMITTE OF SHAARE ZEDEK$7,718
NORTH SHORE HEBREW ACADEMY$6,392
HATZALAH$5,100
THE ALTNEU SYNAGOGUE$4,330
BELEVECHAD$3,960
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF LEMAAN ACHAI$3,472
ZAKA CHESED SHEL EMET$2,768
LUSTGARTEN FOUNDATION$1,057
AMIT CHILDREN INC$1,025
SHARSHERET$1,010
LEKET ISRAEL$1,000
TOMCHEI SHABBOS$750
ELLIE RUBY FOUNDATION$557
ST JUDE$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, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 81% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%ATIME: $360 → 20%ATIME: $180 → 20%LUSTGARTEN FOUNDATION: $1k → 6%BELEVECHAD: $4k → 17%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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$201k · 18 repeat orgs$37k to everyone else

18 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
11

Total granted

$201k
$7k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+7%
+18%

Still filing today

28%
36%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 39% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $31k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesReligionInternationalAnimalsEducationOther
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

  • YH
    YESHIVA HAR TORAH
    2× · 2022–2023 · $2k · revenue +7%
  • SI
    Sharsheret Inc
    2× · 2023–2025 · $1k · revenue +13%
  • CL
    CHAI LIFELINE INC
    3× · 2021–2025 · $793 · revenue +1%

Funded once

  • AC
    AMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC
    one grant, 2024 · $3k · revenue +18%
  • CH
    CHEVRA HATZALAH
    one grant, 2023 · $1k
  • CH
    CAMP HASC INC
    one grant, 2024 · $628 · revenue -26%
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
Sherit Isroel
—
2
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
3
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
4
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
5
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Ahavas Torah V'chesed
Philanthropy
7
Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary

To prepare students for the rabbinate and to issue the traditional certificate of ordination in connection therewith. the seminary is authorized to confer the degree of master of hebrew literature (m.h.l.), doctor of hebrew literature…

Education
8
Aishel Hatzedek
International
9
Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation
Philanthropy
10
Chevras Shabbos Kodesh Podcast Fellowship
Religion
11
Tal Hashamayim Foundation
Religion
12
Ksav Sofer Inc
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chai Lifeline Inc; the most unlike its peers is The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. 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

16 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. 16 of the 44 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
9/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG ISRAEL: $127,521 · OtherNATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG ISRAELNorth Shore Hebrew Academy HS: $23,355 · OtherNorth Shore Hebrew Academy HSBelevchad: $7,800 · OtherAMERICAN COMMITTE OF SHAARE ZEDEK: $7,718 · Other+28 more: $56,358 · Other+28 moreBELEV ECHAD INC: $3,960 · Human ServicesMARC LUSTGARTEN PANCREATIC CANCER FOUNDATION: $1,057 · Human ServicesA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $540 · Human ServicesAMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC: $2,596 · InternationalAMIT CHILDREN INC: $1,025 · InternationalNORTH SHORE MIKVAH ASSOCIATION: $2,574 · ReligionCAMP HASC INC: $628 · ReligionSharsheret Inc: $1,260 · HealthCHAI LIFELINE INC: $793 · HealthTHE ELLIE RUBY FOUNDATION INC: $557 · HealthTHE KOBY MANDELL FOUNDATION INC: $362 · PhilanthropyTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $250 · Animals
Other$222,752Human Services$5,557International$3,621Religion$3,202Health$2,610Philanthropy$362Animals$250

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNORTH SHORE HEBREW ACADEMY: $6,392 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC: $2,596 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNORTH SHORE MIKVAH ASSOCIATION: $2,574 over 6y, 0.9% of budgetYESHIVA HAR TORAH: $1,750 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSharsheret Inc: $1,260 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMARC LUSTGARTEN PANCREATIC CANCER FOUNDATION: $1,057 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $793 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCAMP HASC INC: $628 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $540 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE KOBY MANDELL FOUNDATION INC: $362 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA UNIVERSITY: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVIGILANT ENGINE HOOK & LADDER CO INC: $75 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 NORTH SHORE HEBREW ACADEMY ↗
  • Who funds BELEV ECHAD INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR SHAARE ZEDEK HOSPITAL IN JERUSALEM INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTH SHORE MIKVAH ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA HAR TORAH ↗
  • Who funds Sharsheret Inc ↗
  • Who funds MARC LUSTGARTEN PANCREATIC CANCER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds AMIT CHILDREN INC ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗
  • Who funds CAMP HASC INC ↗
  • Who funds THE ELLIE RUBY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds A Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange ↗
  • Who funds THE KOBY MANDELL FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA UNIVERSITY ↗

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 Mermelstein FoundationNY17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Mermelstein Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Gail & Maurice Setton Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 The Jobarr Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Jobarr Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 4%
  • Sharsheret Inc: 4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get 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 · 0–15%
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 44 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 Jobarr’s filings →

More from the funding graph