Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Pillars Trust

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$104k
Granted FY2024still arriving
50
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$29k
Largest
01What it funds
0153% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$260kPhilanthropy$209kCommunity Improvement$109kCivil Rights$45kPublic Benefit$8kPublic Safety & Disaster$4kYouth Development$1kHealth$1kOther$0
02FY2024 · 50 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k47 grants · $40k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $64k
$250
Median grant
2
States reached
$966k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
mosdos chasidie square TYY of BP$29,100
cong tyy of montreal$24,150
Individual grant recipient$11,200
Individual grant recipient$7,370
cong sdei yakov square$6,100
cong toldos spring valley$6,000
shekel hakodesh$3,100
Individual grant recipient$2,680
cong ohel torah$1,900
cong khal chasidei square$1,820
cong of new square$1,390
Individual grant recipient$1,200
new square emergency services$1,060
Individual grant recipient$1,000
Individual grant recipient$681
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 (FY21–24, $962) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%a time: $79 → 20%a time: $72 → 20%a time: $54 → 20%a time: $54 → 20%a time: $54 → 20%bonei olam: $150 → 20%bonei olam: $150 → 20%bonei olam: $125 → 20%bonei olam: $72 → 20%bonei olam: $50 → 20%tomech yisroel: $72 → 14%misaskim: $20 → 14%misaskim: $10 → 14%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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$741k · 78 repeat orgs$42k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +20% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

78 repeat relationships: 45 still active in FY2024, 33 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

78
72

Total granted

$741k
$40k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+20%
+13%

Still filing today

15%
11%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k 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
ReligionHuman ServicesHealthPhilanthropyFood & NutritionInternationalOther
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

  • MM
    MAAMAR MORDECHAI INC
    2× · 2022–2024 · $720 · revenue +0%
  • BO
    Bonei Olam Inc
    4× · 2021–2024 · $547 · revenue +24%
  • TC
    TORAH & CHESED FUND
    2× · 2021–2023 · $320 · revenue +115%

Funded once

  • CH
    Cong Horei Besomim Stree
    one grant, 2021 · $10k
  • YL
    YAD LTALMID INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $8k · revenue +36%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $6k
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
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
2
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
3
Mishken Chaim Rivnits

Assistance to the indigent

Religion
4
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
5
Ahavas Torah V'chesed
Philanthropy
6
Gemilas Chesed Kramer Inc
Philanthropy
7
Ohr Yisrael Yeshiva Inc

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

Religion
8
Chabad Lametayel Inc

encourage and facilitate the observance of traditional orthodox Jewish practices around the world.

—
9
Shaarei Halacha Inc
Philanthropy
10
Mifal Tzedaka Vchesed Chasdei Aharo N Inc

Provide financial assistance to torah and talmudic scholars, as well as to other needy individuals and other organizations that work to promote these purposes.

Philanthropy
11
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
12
Rashbi Tehillim Incorporated
Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Keren Hashviis Inc; the most unlike its peers is Misaskim Corp. 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 155 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)
20/21
Grantees still filing
15/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DETAILS OF CONTRIBUTION TO CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST: $208,156 · OtherDETAILS OF CONTRIBUTION TO CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS AVAILABLE UPON REQUESTmerkaz hakolilim building fund: $184,000 · Othermerkaz hakolilim building fundmosdos chasidie square TYY of BP: $55,000 · Othermosdos chasidie square TYY of BPcong toldos spring valley: $53,768 · Othercong toldos spring valleycong tyy of montreal: $45,050 · Othercong tyy of montrealIndividual grant recipient: $30,660 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $25,753 · Other+129 more: $167,890 · Other+129 moreYAD LTALMID INC: $8,350 · ReligionKEREN HASHVIIS INC: $1,210 · ReligionMAAMAR MORDECHAI INC: $720 · Religion+4 more: $100 · ReligionBonei Olam Inc: $547 · Human ServicesA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $313 · Human ServicesTOMEICH YISROEL INC: $72 · Human Services+1 more: $30 · Human ServicesTORAH & CHESED FUND: $320 · PhilanthropySHUVU RETURN INC: $43 · PhilanthropyREFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES: $54 · HealthBIKUR CHOLIM INC: $30 · HealthCHAI LIFELINE INC: $25 · HealthLev Leyeled Inc: $10 · HealthMASBIA: $25 · Food & NutritionAGUDAS TOV V'CHESED INC: $10 · International
Other$770,277Religion$10,380Human Services$962Philanthropy$363Health$119Food & Nutrition$25International$10

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetYAD LTALMID INC: $8,350 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetKEREN HASHVIIS INC: $1,210 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMAAMAR MORDECHAI INC: $720 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetBonei Olam Inc: $547 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTORAH & CHESED FUND: $320 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $313 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTOMEICH YISROEL INC: $72 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetREFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES: $54 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSHUVU RETURN INC: $43 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVAS OHR V'DAAS: $35 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMISASKIM CORP: $30 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBIKUR CHOLIM INC: $30 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMIFAL MAYUNES INC: $25 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMIKVAH USA INC: $25 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $25 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMASBIA: $25 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetArachim America Inc: $15 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAGUDAS TOV V'CHESED INC: $10 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLev Leyeled Inc: $10 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA DERECH CHAIM: $5 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 YAD LTALMID INC ↗
  • Who funds KEREN HASHVIIS 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 FundNY42.5× affinity24 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Ani Mamin Foundation · The Gds Foundation · Mezritch Foundation · Mtw Services Inc · Breuer Charitable Foundation Inc · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Dove Holdings · Rachels Foundation · Jeffrey Charitable Foundation · The Light of Chaim Foundation · Ohel Naftoly

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 Pillars Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Pillars Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Pillars Trust?

    Find your warmest path to The Pillars Trust 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 155 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 Pillars’ filings →

    More from the funding graph