Skip to content
The Jonathan & Esther B Rosenberg Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Jonathan & Esther B Rosenberg 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.

$817k
Granted FY2024still arriving
40
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$131k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0181% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Religion$3.6MInternational$307kHealth$300kArts & Culture$288kEducation$154kYouth Development$30kHuman Services$24kFood & Nutrition$11kOther$0
02FY2024 · 40 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k23 grants · $55k
  • $10k–50k12 grants · $295k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $467k
$6,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$20M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BAIS HAMEDRASH CHASIDEI AMSHINOV$131,000
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF AMSHINOVER YESHIVA JERUSALEM$130,000
CONG TZEDAKA VUCHESED AMSHINOV$92,000
Individual grant recipient$59,000
PROSPECT PARK YESHIVA$55,000
YESHIVA OF SPRING VALLEY INC$45,400
CHESED OF LAKEWOOD$40,700
BETH HAMEDRASH CHASIDIM$40,000
MOSDOS PNEI MENACHEM$30,400
FRIENDS OF THE PITTSBURGH INSTITUTIONS$30,000
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF SFATH EMETH YESHIVA$24,000
CHAIM VEHESED OF RARITAN VALLEY$24,000
YESHIVA OHR YEHUDA$18,000
PILLARS PJS$12,250
CONG KHAL BAIS AVROHOM INC$10,000
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 (FY18–24, $17k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 71% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CHAIM LECHAG INC: $2k → 9%TOMCHEI SHABBOS OF BERGEN COUNTY INC: $2k → 7%CHAIM LECHAG INC: $600 → 9%TOMCHEI SHABBOS OF BERGEN COUNTY INC: $1k → 7%HELPING OUT PEOPLE EVERYDAY: $500 → 11%THE SIMCHAS MAYER FUND: $5k → 20%THE SIMCHAS MAYER FUND: $4k → 20%THE SIMCHAS MAYER FUND: $2k → 20%BONEI OLAM: $360 → 20%BONEI OLAM: $360 → 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.
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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.7M · 74 repeat orgs$530k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +77% since the first grant, against +45% for those funded once.

74 repeat relationships: 34 still active in FY2024, 40 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

74
61

Total granted

$4.7M
$483k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+77%
+45%

Still filing today

24%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $47k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
ReligionEducationHealthHuman ServicesPhilanthropyInternationalOther
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

  • MR
    Mosdos Rabbainu Nachum Meshadyk
    3× · 2017–2020 · $328k · revenue +252%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF AMSHINOVER YESHIVA JERUSALEM INC
    5× · 2017–2021 · $302k · revenue +149%
  • CV
    CHAIM VCHESED OF RARITAN VALLEY INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $164k · revenue +74% · 39% of their budget

Funded once

  • CA
    CONGREGATION ATERES ROSH INC
    one grant, 2019 · $157k
  • CL
    CONGREGATION LEV SIMCHA
    one grant, 2023 · $60k
  • TS
    THE SEPHARDIC HERITAGE MUSEUM INC
    one grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue -6%
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
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
3
Yeshiva Toras Chaim of Greater Miami Inc

To operate a religious school for high school and post high school students.

Education
4
Chevras Shabbos Kodesh Podcast Fellowship
Religion
5
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
6
Ohr Yisrael Yeshiva Inc

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

Religion
7
Bnei Moshe
Philanthropy
8
Mosdos Hatorah Vhachesed of Pnei Menachem Inc

To foster, promote and advance theological torah study, charity, and practice of orthodox judaism worldwide.

Philanthropy
9
Ahavas Torah V'chesed
Philanthropy
10
Friends of Meor Israel

Education and religious activities and research

Education
11
Kollel Ohr Hatorah Inc

To expand torah education

Religion
12
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Friends of Mosdot Goor; the most unlike its peers is The Friends of the Pittsburgh Institutions. 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

40 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. 40 of the 142 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
18
Early backer (in before they grew)
38/40
Grantees still filing
31/40
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BETH HAMEDRASH CHASIDIM: $530,000 · OtherBETH HAMEDRASH CHASIDIMAMERICAN FRIENDS OF AMSHINOVER YESHIVA JERUSALEM: $374,500 · OtherAMERICAN FRIENDS OF AMSHINOVER YESHIVA JERUSALEMIndividual grant recipient: $330,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCONG AHAVAS TZDOKAH V'CHESSED: $286,780 · OtherCONG AHAVAS TZDOKAH V'CHESSEDCONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INC: $244,300 · OtherCONGREGATION AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESED INCTHE FRIENDS OF THE PITTSBURGH INSTITUTIONS: $228,000 · OtherTHE FRIENDS OF THE PITTSBURGH INSTITUTIONSRABBI JACOB JOSEPH YESHIVA: $209,500 · OtherRABBI JACOB JOSEPH YESHIVAMESAMCHE LEV: $172,700 · OtherBAIS HAMEDRASH CHASIDEI AMSHINOV: $163,000 · OtherCONGREGATION ATERES ROSH INC: $157,000 · OtherCONG TZEDAKA VUCHESED AMSHINOV: $133,800 · Other+99 more: $993,454 · Other+99 moreMosdos Rabbainu Nachum Meshadyk: $328,000 · ReligionMosdos Rabb…MOSDOS PNEI MENACHEM INC: $161,000 · ReligionMOSDOS PNEI…+9 more: $54,090 · Religion+9 moreCHAIM VCHESED OF RARITAN VALLEY INC: $164,000 · HealthCHESED OF LAKEWOOD INC: $125,600 · HealthPILLARS PJS INC: $12,250 · Health+2 more: $10,540 · HealthAMERICAN FRIENDS OF AMSHINOVER YESHIVA JERUSALEM INC: $301,600 · International+1 more: $540 · InternationalFRIENDS OF MOSDOT GOOR: $105,000 · EducationYESHIVA OHR YEHUDA INC: $71,000 · EducationNACHLAS BAIS YAAKOV: $46,000 · EducationYESHIVA ORCHOS CHAIM INC: $15,820 · Education+5 more: $3,300 · EducationTHE SEPHARDIC HERITAGE MUSEUM INC: $50,000 · Arts & Culture+1 more: $150 · Arts & CultureAMERICAN FRIENDS OF SFATH EMETH YESHIVA: $24,000 · PhilanthropyRAV L'HOISHIA FOUNDATION: $1,800 · Philanthropy+1 more: $180 · Philanthropy
Other$3,823,034Religion$543,090Health$312,390International$302,140Education$241,120Arts & Culture$50,150Philanthropy$25,980

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMosdos Rabbainu Nachum Meshadyk: $328,000 over 3y, 10% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF AMSHINOVER YESHIVA JERUSALEM INC: $301,600 over 5y, 16% of budgetTHE FRIENDS OF THE PITTSBURGH INSTITUTIONS: $228,000 over 5y, 9.0% of budgetCHAIM VCHESED OF RARITAN VALLEY INC: $164,000 over 8y, 39% of budgetMOSDOS PNEI MENACHEM INC: $161,000 over 5y, 9.1% of budgetCHESED OF LAKEWOOD INC: $125,600 over 6y, 3.9% of budgetFRIENDS OF MOSDOT GOOR: $105,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetYESHIVA OHR YEHUDA INC: $71,000 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetTHE SEPHARDIC HERITAGE MUSEUM INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetNACHLAS BAIS YAAKOV: $46,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF SFATH EMETH YESHIVA: $24,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetYESHIVA ORCHOS CHAIM INC: $15,820 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetLEV BEREL INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetOHR NAAVA: $12,700 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetPILLARS PJS INC: $12,250 over 1y, 6.8% of budgetTHE SIMCHAS MAYER FUND INC: $10,600 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetCHEVRA HATZOLAH OF MIDDLESEX COUNTY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 6.5% of budgetMosdos Opele Inc: $8,600 over 2y, 5.7% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF KUPAT HA'IR: $5,040 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetKNESET MORDECHAI: $4,850 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetKUPAS YOM TOV INC: $3,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTZUR FOUNDATION INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTOMCHEI SHABBOS OF BERGEN COUNTY: $2,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCHAIM LECHAG INC: $2,400 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBNOS ESTHER MALKA INC: $1,080 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA RUACH HATORAH INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBonei Olam Inc: $720 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLev Leyeled Inc: $540 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetKOLEL CHIBAS JERUSALEM: $540 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHELPING OUT PEOPLE EVERDAY CORP: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetYESHIVA DERECH CHAIM: $360 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA TORAS ARON INC: $360 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOHR NOSSON INC: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMISAMEACH INC: $150 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTorahAnytimeCom Inc: $100 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 Mosdos Rabbainu Nachum Meshadyk ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF AMSHINOVER YESHIVA JERUSALEM INC ↗
  • Who funds THE FRIENDS OF THE PITTSBURGH INSTITUTIONS ↗
  • Who funds CHAIM VCHESED OF RARITAN VALLEY INC ↗
  • Who funds MOSDOS PNEI MENACHEM INC ↗
  • Who funds CHESED OF LAKEWOOD INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF MOSDOT GOOR ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA OHR YEHUDA INC ↗
  • Who funds THE SEPHARDIC HERITAGE MUSEUM INC ↗
  • Who funds NACHLAS BAIS YAAKOV ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF SFATH EMETH YESHIVA ↗

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 FundThe Sorala FoundationRegina Goldwasser Fou…The Jimmy and Berta K…The Fishoff Family Fo…Jack Adjmi Family Fou…Chaim Maleh FoundationZichron Btz Tzedakah …Donors Fund IncJewish Community Foun…Friends of Mosdot Goor
The Ojc FundNY66.6× affinity53 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 · The Sorala Foundation · Regina Goldwasser Foundation · The Jimmy and Berta Khezrie Charitable Foundation · The Fishoff Family Foundation · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Chaim Maleh Foundation · Zichron Btz Tzedakah Foundation · Donors Fund Inc · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Friends of Mosdot Goor

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 Jonathan & Esther B Rosenberg Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Jonathan & Esther B Rosenberg Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 140%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →median 3%
  • Yeshiva Toras Aron Inc: 8% of income from government
  • Yeshiva Orchos Chaim Inc: 5% of income from government
  • Yeshiva Ohr Yehuda Inc: 3% of income from government
  • Nachlas Bais Yaakov: 2% of income from government
  • Bnos Esther Malka Inc: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
14get 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, FY20–24
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 The Jonathan & Esther B Rosenberg Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Jonathan & Esther B Rosenberg Foundation 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 142 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 Jonathan & Esther B Rosenberg’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