Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Seg Foundation

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.

$527k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$250k
Largest
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Religion$6.6MHealth$103kCommunity Improvement$25kHuman Services$12kEducation$7kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $6k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $256k
  • $250k+1 grant · $250k
$69,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$5.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$250,000
YESHIVA OHR HAMEIR$100,000
MISCELLANEOUS$86,584
MOSDOS BOSTON OF LAKEWOOD$69,000
BNOS BAIS YAAKOV$15,000
KOLLEL BNEI YESHIVOS$5,000
TORAH ACADEMY FOR GIRLS$1,000
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 (FY17–22, $110k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%YASHAR COALITION: $12k → 20%RELIEF RESOURCES: $18k → 20%RELIEF RESOURCES: $18k → 20%RELIEF RESOURCES: $18k → 20%RELIEF RESOURCES: $18k → 20%RELIEF RESOURCES: $15k → 20%RELIEF RESOURCES: $10k → 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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$6.7M · 29 repeat orgs$407k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +164% since the first grant, against +58% for those funded once.

29 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 23 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

29
22

Total granted

$6.7M
$338k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+164%
+58%

Still filing today

14%
23%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $69k 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
EducationReligionHuman ServicesHealthCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyOther
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

  • RR
    RELIEF RESOURCES INC
    6× · 2017–2022 · $97k · revenue +183%
  • MU
    Moadim Uzmanim
    4× · 2020–2023 · $72k · revenue +164%
  • BB
    BNOS BAIS YAAKOV OF FAR ROCKAWAY
    3× · 2023–2025 · $41k · revenue +36%

Funded once

  • KI
    KHAL ICHUD CHASIDIM
    one grant, 2023 · $50k
  • MH
    MERKAZ HATZEDAKA CORP
    one grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue +12%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $25k
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
Yeshiva Toras Chaim of Greater Miami Inc

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

Education
3
Yeshivat Yagdil Torah Inc

Providing jewish and secular education for elementary school aged children.

Education
4
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
5
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Yeshiva Bais Mordechai of Teaneck

To provide religious Jewish education.

Education
7
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
8
Yeshiva Shaar Hatalmud

Providing jewish education to high school age students.

Education
9
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
10
Yeshivat Ohel Torah

To conduct a school for Hebrew religious education

Religion
11
Ohr Yisrael Yeshiva Inc

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

Religion
12
Yeshiva Nesivos Hatorah Inc

Providing jewish and secular education for elementary school aged children.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Yeshiva Ohr Yehuda Inc; the most unlike its peers is Moadim Uzmanim. 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

11 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. 11 of the 53 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MISCELLANEOUS: $1,356,840 · OtherMISCELLANEOUSCONGREGATION YESHIVA OHR HAMEIR: $1,157,200 · OtherCONGREGATION YESHIVA OHR HAMEIRIndividual grant recipient: $499,200 · OtherIndividual grant recipientKEREN HACHESED: $420,250 · OtherKEREN HACHESEDKAHAL TEFILO LEMOSHE: $408,625 · OtherKAHAL TEFILO LEMOSHEKAHAL DARKEI NOAM: $389,850 · OtherKAHAL DARKEI NOAMIndividual grant recipient: $359,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCong Bobov 45: $318,000 · OtherKOLLEL BNEI YESHIVAS: $317,250 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $241,100 · Other+33 more: $1,252,370 · Other+33 moreYESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK: $163,500 · ReligionTorahAnytimeCom Inc: $25,000 · ReligionRELIEF RESOURCES INC: $97,400 · Human ServicesYASHAR COALITION INC: $12,250 · Human ServicesMoadim Uzmanim: $72,400 · PhilanthropyBNOS BAIS YAAKOV OF FAR ROCKAWAY: $41,000 · EducationYESHIVA OHR YEHUDA INC: $7,900 · EducationYESHIVAS OHR HATORAH INC: $7,200 · EducationMERKAZ HATZEDAKA CORP: $25,000 · Community ImprovementCHAI LIFELINE INC: $5,400 · Health
Other$6,719,685Religion$188,500Human Services$109,650Philanthropy$72,400Education$56,100Community Improvement$25,000Health$5,400

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetYESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK: $163,500 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetRELIEF RESOURCES INC: $97,400 over 6y, 0.9% of budgetMoadim Uzmanim: $72,400 over 4y, 2.2% of budgetAGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA: $65,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetBNOS BAIS YAAKOV OF FAR ROCKAWAY: $41,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetMERKAZ HATZEDAKA CORP: $25,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetTorahAnytimeCom Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetYESHIVA OHR YEHUDA INC: $7,900 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetYESHIVAS OHR HATORAH INC: $7,200 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $5,400 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 OHR YITZCHOK ↗
  • Who funds RELIEF RESOURCES INC ↗
  • Who funds Moadim Uzmanim ↗
  • Who funds AGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds BNOS BAIS YAAKOV OF FAR ROCKAWAY ↗
  • Who funds MERKAZ HATZEDAKA CORP ↗
  • Who funds TorahAnytimeCom 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 FundNY34× affinity18 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Yarim Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · National Society for Hebrew Day Schools · The Jimmy and Berta Khezrie Charitable Foundation · The Pbg Foundation · Caroline & Joseph S Gruss Life Monument Funds Inc · Regina Goldwasser Foundation · Maalot · The Basch Family Foundation · Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 28%
  • Yeshivas Ohr Hatorah Inc: 28% of income from government
  • Yeshiva Ohr Yehuda Inc: 3% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get 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 · 0–50%
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 Seg Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Seg 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 53 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 Seg’s filings →

More from the funding graph