Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Yacov and Rita Marmurstein Charitable Foundation Trust

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.

$534k
Granted FY2024still arriving
15
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it funds
0174% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$1.3MHousing & Shelter$2kInternational$500Education$500Youth Development$500Philanthropy$50Other$0
02FY2024 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 15 grants below total $49,880, the rows itemized in this filing. The $533,800 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $483,920 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k13 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $30k
$1,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$10M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
American Friends of Orchot Torah$20,000
Bais Medrash Ateres Yisroel$10,000
Cong. Bais Medrash Elyon$6,000
American Friends of Zichron Nachum$3,600
Cong Yeshiva Yad Moshe$2,800
Ahiezer$1,800
Mifal Ezra Zichron Yehuda$1,000
Yeshiva Minchas Yitzchok$1,000
Congregation Beth Medrash Darkei Yosher$1,000
Renewal$500
American Committee for Ahavas Torah Inc$500
American Friends of Yeshivath Meor Hatalmud$500
Tiferet$500
Yeshivas Tiferes Yisroel Haifa Inc$500
RCCS$180
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%YESHIVA SHAAR EPHRAIM: $15k → 14%MIFAL EZRA ZICHRON YEHUDA: $20k → 20%CONG SHAAREI CHESED: $2k → 7%BEIT MIDRASH GOVAAH: $267k → 11%MERKAZ HATORAH: $18k → 14%YESHIVA DARCHEI TORAH: $10k → 13%WORLD HOME FOUNDATION: $2k → 17%MIFAL EZRA ZICHRON YEHUDA: $10k → 20%BETH MEDRASH GOVOHA: $220k → 11%MIFAL EZRA ZICHRON YEHUDA: $4k → 20%BEIT MIDRASH GOVAAH: $106k → 11%BEIT MIDRASH GOVAAH: $96k → 11%BNEI YERUSHALAIM: $50k → 14%BETH MEDRASH GOVOHA: $75k → 11%CONGREGATION NACHLAS MOSHE: $17k → 14%BEIT MIDRASH GOVAAH: $70k → 11%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF ZICHRON NACHUM: $5k → 14%YESHIVA ATERES YISROEL: $10k → 11%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF ZICHRON NACHUM: $4k → 14%CONG MERKAZ TZEDEK INC: $2k → 20%MERKAZ CHASIDEI VIZNITZ: $100k → 20%KEREN ACHEINU BNEI YISROEL INC: $2k → 20%BNEI EMUNIM: $80k → 20%BNEI EMUNIM: $55k → 20%CONGREGATION BETH YEHUDA: $15k → 20%CONGREGATION BRIZDOWITZ: $6k → 20%CENTRAL CHARITY INSTITUTE: $500k → 20%CONGREGATION BRIZDOWITZ: $5k → 20%CONGREGATION BNEI YECHIEL: $32k → 20%HASDEI ELIEZER: $5k → 20%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF ORCHOT TORAH: $20k → 20%YESHIVA MAMAR MORDECHAI NADVORNA: $4k → 20%CONGREGATION BNEI YECHIEL: $15k → 20%CONGREGATION BARUCH YISROEL: $4k → 20%BINYAN YERUSHALAYIM: $15k → 20%YESHIVA MAMAR MORDECHAI NADVORNA: $4k → 20%CONGREGATION BNEI YECHIEL: $15k → 20%YESHIVA MAMAR MORDECHAI NADVORNA: $2k → 20%CONG AHAVAS TZDOKAH VCHESSED: $10k → 20%YESHIVA MAMAR MORDECHAI NADVORNA: $2k → 20%CONG YETEV LEV: $10k → 20%CONGREGATION YOSHIVA YAD MOSHE: $2k → 20%CONG CHOCHMAS ELIEZER: $3k → 20%CHASDI ELUZAR INC: $2k → 20%CONG BARUCH YISROEL KHAL BRISDOVITZ: $5k → 20%CONGREGATION LIMENOV: $15k → 20%YESHIVA MENCHAS YITZCHOK: $3k → 20%YESHIVA MENCHAS YITZCHOK: $3k → 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.

58%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 21 repeat orgs$856k to everyone else

21 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2024, 14 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
52

Total granted

$1.2M
$834k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+19%
+37%

Still filing today

24%
13%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 57% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $21k 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
PhilanthropyReligionEducationYouth DevelopmentInternationalOther
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

  • YM
    YESHIVA MAMAR MORDECHAI NADVORNA
    4× · 2020–2023 · $12k · revenue +241%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVATH MEOR HATALMUD
    2× · 2021–2024 · $2k · revenue +19%
  • AC
    American Commitee for Ahavas Torah Inc
    2× · 2020–2024 · $1k · revenue +26%

Funded once

  • CC
    CENTRAL CHARITY INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2021 · $500k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $100k
  • BY
    BNEI YERUSHALAIM
    one grant, 2018 · $50k
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
American Friends of Amshinover Yeshiva Jerusalem Inc

Support of religious schools in Israel

International
2
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
3
American Friends of Yeshiva Gedolah Matisyahu Inc

To award scholarships and grants to students from the United States attending Yeshivas Gedolah Matisyahu in the State of Israel

Education
4
American Friends of Yeshivat Nachalat Yossef

The organization will provide financial assistance to educational institutions that promote the observance of the jewish religion, its laws and traditions, and sacred texts, including yeshivat nachalat yossef, located in jerusalem, israel.

Religion
5
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
6
American Friends of Heichal Yerushalayim Inc

The funding of heichal yerushalayim yeshiva(religious shcool) to facilitate and promote judaic studies.

Youth Development
7
National Torah Initiative

To support and develop jewish educational institutions

Religion
8
American Friends of Yeshiva Ner Aharon

The organization's primary activity is that of raising funds primarily for distribution to israeli institutions of higher learning. the funds may be distributed to other institutions organized exclusively for religious, charitable and…

Religion
9
Ziv Israel Association
—
10
American Friends of Amaleh Shel Torah Inc

None

Education
11
American Friends of Keshet Yehuda Nfp

religious and educational program for post high school youth

Philanthropy
12
American Friends of Torat Eliyahu
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Yeshiva Ohel Simon of Jerusalem Inc; the most unlike its peers is Nesivos Inc. 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

16 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 16 of the 82 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/16
Grantees still filing
11/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $539,280 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCENTRAL CHARITY INSTITUTE: $499,900 · OtherCENTRAL CHARITY INSTITUTEBETH MEDRASH GOVOHA: $295,000 · OtherBETH MEDRASH GOVOHABNEI EMUNIM: $135,000 · OtherBNEI EMUNIMIndividual grant recipient: $100,000 · Other+63 more: $419,850 · Other+63 moreAmerican Friends of Orchot Torah DRav Shteinman Inc: $40,000 · PhilanthropyKeren Acheinu Bnei Yisroel Inc: $1,800 · Philanthropy+4 more: $2,150 · PhilanthropyYESHIVA MAMAR MORDECHAI NADVORNA: $11,500 · ReligionYESHIVAS TIFERES YISROEL HAIFA INC: $1,000 · ReligionCHOFETZ CHAIM HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $1,000 · Religion+1 more: $300 · ReligionAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVATH MEOR HATALMUD: $1,500 · EducationMESIVTA KEREN ORAH: $500 · EducationNESIVOS INC: $500 · Youth DevelopmentYEDIDEI BEER YITZCHAK INC: $180 · International
Other$1,989,030Philanthropy$43,950Religion$13,800Education$2,000Youth Development$500International$180

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAmerican Friends of Orchot Torah DRav Shteinman Inc: $40,000 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetYESHIVA MAMAR MORDECHAI NADVORNA: $11,500 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetKeren Acheinu Bnei Yisroel Inc: $1,800 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetALUMNI OF THE RABBINICAL COLLEGE KNESSETH ISRAEL OF SLABODKA KOWNA: $1,800 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVATH MEOR HATALMUD: $1,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAmerican Commitee for Ahavas Torah Inc: $1,100 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCHOFETZ CHAIM HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNESIVOS INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTORAT CHESED TRUST: $500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetPEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDAAS MEISHARIM: $50 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 American Friends of Orchot Torah DRav Shteinman Inc ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA MAMAR MORDECHAI NADVORNA ↗

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 FundNY38.9× affinity24 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Zichron Yechiel Mechel Foundation · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore · Jewish Communal Fund · The Jmg Foundation · National Society for Hebrew Day Schools · Emes Foundation Inc · Zichron Simcha Dsassov · The Basch Family Foundation · The Adjmi-Dwek Foundation Inc · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund

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 Yacov and Rita Marmurstein Charitable Foundation Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Yacov and Rita Marmurstein Charitable Foundation Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 10%
  • Mesivta Keren Orah: 10% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
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.

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 82 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 Yacov and Rita Marmurstein’s filings →

More from the funding graph