Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Louis and Jean Freeman Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$8k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What it funds
0179% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$70kEducation$31kInternational$3kHuman Services$2kHealth$1kPhilanthropy$500Public Safety & Disaster$250Youth Development$200Other$0
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$720
Median grant
2
States reached
$329k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$3,038
Individual grant recipient$1,250
Manhattan High School for Girls$1,050
AGUDAS ISRAEL BAIS BINYOMIN$900
BAIS YAAKOV OF SPRING VALLEY$720
Individual grant recipient$360
MEOROT HATORAH INC$360
Yeshiva Gedola of Cliffwood$250
OZER DALIM OF NY INC$180
AMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR AHAVAS TORAH$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.

show:

Its 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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Bonei Olam: $1k → 20%Keren Aniyim: $180 → 20%Jes 2016 Inc: $5k → 20%Bonei Olam: $120 → 20%Misaskim: $120 → 20%Yeshivas Beis Dovid Inc: $500 → 20%We Love To Help Inc: $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.

80%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$113k · 19 repeat orgs$29k to everyone else

19 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
37

Total granted

$113k
$25k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+38%

Still filing today

16%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 54% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesReligionEducationInternationalPhilanthropyCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • YO
    YESHIVA OF FAR ROCKAWAY
    3× · 2021–2023 · $27k
  • BJ
    BETH JACOB DAY SCHOOL
    2× · 2022–2023 · $25k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    9× · 2017–2025 · $25k

Funded once

  • CB
    CONG BAIS SHALOM INC
    one grant, 2021 · $8k
  • J2
    JES 2016 INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +116%
  • SS
    SHAAREI SHMUOS INC
    one grant, 2021 · $2k · revenue -66%
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
Meir Isa Bracha Inc

To help establish and maintain agendas for Hebrew and religious enlightenment

Religion
2
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
3
American Friends of Amshinover Yeshiva Jerusalem Inc

Support of religious schools in Israel

International
4
Mishken Chaim Rivnits

Assistance to the indigent

Religion
5
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
6
Emet Veshalom Inc

To support organizations in israel that promote and encourage the study of jewish literary works including the study of the torah, mishna and talmud.

Religion
7
Gemilas Chesed Kramer Inc
Philanthropy
8
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
9
Yeshiva Beit Rafael

Religious & charitable- to provide funds to enable the study of torah.

Philanthropy
10
Rabbi Meir Baal Haness Charity of Jerusalem Inc
Philanthropy
11
American Friends of Keshet Yehuda Nfp

religious and educational program for post high school youth

Philanthropy
12
American Friends of Kehillas Shivtei Yeshurun Inc

Assistance to establish a community in ramat beit shemesh, israel, founded upon torah principles, prayer, justice, charity and kindness to all peoples. to encourage and promote jewish religious activities.

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Kneset Mordechai; 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.
04the grantee network

21 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. 21 of the 61 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/21
Grantees still filing
13/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BETH JACOB DAY SCHOOL: $25,300 · OtherBETH JACOB DAY SCHOOLIndividual grant recipient: $24,858 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCONG BAIS YEHUDAH: $9,875 · OtherCONG BAIS YEHUDAHCONG BAIS SHALOM INC: $8,000 · OtherCONG BAIS SHALOM INCYESHIVA WOLOZHIN BNEI BRAK ISRAEL I: $6,500 · OtherYESHIVA WOLOZHIN BNEI BRAK ISRAEL I+38 more: $27,590 · Other+38 moreYESHIVA OF FAR ROCKAWAY: $26,800 · ReligionYESHIVA OF FAR ROCKAWAYKOLLEL KOL AHARON INC CO AVA RABINOWITZ: $1,500 · Religion+2 more: $640 · ReligionJES 2016 INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesBonei Olam Inc: $1,320 · Human ServicesYESHIVAS BEIS DOVID INC: $500 · Human ServicesWE LOVE TO HELP: $360 · Human Services+2 more: $300 · Human ServicesSHAAREI SHMUOS INC: $1,800 · InternationalPROJECT REFUAH INC: $180 · InternationalTHE FLATBUSH COMMUNITY FUND INC co BERNATH & ROSENBERG PC: $500 · PhilanthropyAmerican Commitee for Ahavas Torah Inc: $200 · PhilanthropyMERKAZ HATZEDAKA CORP: $500 · Community ImprovementEMET OUTREACH: $250 · EducationYESHIVA HIGH SCHOOL OF ARIZONA: $150 · EducationAMERICAN FRIENDS OF RCT INC: $100 · Education
Other$102,123Religion$28,940Human Services$7,480International$1,980Philanthropy$700Community Improvement$500Education$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$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSHAAREI SHMUOS INC: $1,800 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetKOLLEL KOL AHARON INC CO AVA RABINOWITZ: $1,500 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetBonei Olam Inc: $1,320 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLHACHYOS LEV INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetMEOROT HATORAH INC: $540 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetYESHIVAS BEIS DOVID INC: $500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE FLATBUSH COMMUNITY FUND INC co BERNATH & ROSENBERG PC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMERKAZ HATZEDAKA CORP: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEMET OUTREACH: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetANCHOR MENTORING INC: $200 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAmerican Commitee for Ahavas Torah Inc: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPROJECT REFUAH INC: $180 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetKEREN ANIYIM INC: $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA HIGH SCHOOL OF ARIZONA: $150 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMISASKIM CORP: $120 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF RCT INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKNESET MORDECHAI: $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 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 MEOROT HATORAH INC ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVAS BEIS DOVID INC ↗
  • Who funds THE FLATBUSH COMMUNITY FUND INC co BERNATH & ROSENBERG PC ↗
  • Who funds MERKAZ HATZEDAKA CORP ↗
  • Who funds WE LOVE TO HELP ↗
  • Who funds HATZALAH OF THE ROCKAWAYS & NASSAU COUNTY 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 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 · 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

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 Louis and Jean Freeman Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Louis and Jean Freeman Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    5get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 61 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 Louis and Jean Freeman’s filings →

    More from the funding graph