· Private foundation
The Louis and Jean Freeman Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $3,362 |
| cong ahavas tzdokah v'chesed | $180 |
| Bais Yaakov of Spring Valley | $100 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–22, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
16 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 14 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
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 FY2024, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $100 went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- YOYESHIVA OF FAR ROCKAWAY3× · 2021–2023 · $27k
- BJBETH JACOB DAY SCHOOL2× · 2022–2023 · $25k
- IGIndividual grant recipient8× · 2017–2024 · $22k
Funded once
- CBCONG BAIS SHALOM INCone grant, 2021 · $8k
- J2JES 2016 INCgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +116%
- SSSHAAREI SHMUOS INCone grant, 2021 · $2k · revenue -66%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Religious Teaching
To help establish and maintain agendas for Hebrew and religious enlightenment
Assistance to the indigent
Support of religious schools in Israel
To support organizations in israel that promote and encourage the study of jewish literary works including the study of the torah, mishna and talmud.
Ohr Yisrael is a religious institution that provides religious services and instruction to Rabbis and community members.
Religious & charitable- to provide funds to enable the study of torah.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Kneset Mordechai and the most unlike its peers is We Love to Help. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 17 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 9% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
21 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 21 of the 56 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds YESHIVA OF FAR ROCKAWAY ↗
- Who funds JES 2016 INC ↗
- Who funds SHAAREI SHMUOS INC ↗
- Who funds KOLLEL KOL AHARON INC CO AVA RABINOWITZ ↗
- Who funds Bonei Olam Inc ↗
- Who funds LHACHYOS LEV INC ↗
- Who funds YESHIVAS BEIS DOVID INC ↗
- Who funds MERKAZ HATZEDAKA CORP ↗
- Who funds THE FLATBUSH COMMUNITY FUND INC co BERNATH & ROSENBERG PC ↗
- Who funds WE LOVE TO HELP ↗
- Who funds EMET OUTREACH ↗
- Who funds HATZALAH OF THE ROCKAWAYS & NASSAU COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds ANCHOR MENTORING INC ↗
- Who funds MEOROT HATORAH INC ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · Zichron Yechiel Mechel Foundation · Alyad Foundation Inc · The Jmg Foundation · The Basch Family Foundation · The Ganger Foundation Inc · Allen I Gross Charitable Foundation · Regina Goldwasser Foundation · The Fishoff Family Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization The Louis and Jean Freeman Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.