Skip to content

· Private foundation

Tova Ubrucha 26 Foundation

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.

$9k
Granted FY2024still arriving
17
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$4k
Largest
01What it funds
0172% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

Religion$79kEducation$8kHealth$5kHuman Services$756Philanthropy$352Arts & Culture$252Public Benefit$150Other$0
02FY2024 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$180
Median grant
1
States reached
$220k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Bais Esther School$4,000
Mosdos Bobov - 45$2,173
Bonei Olam Inc$500
Individual grant recipient$480
Atime$260
Kolel Shomre Hachomos$200
Congregation Rav Lehoshia Inc$180
Individual grant recipient$180
Zichron Shlome Refuah Fund$180
F F Foundation$100
Cong Machna Shalva$70
Vyazreim$50
Bais Brocho Dkarlin Stolin$50
Matat Mordechai$36
Yad Velev Inc$36
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 (FY18–24, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, 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%Atime: $260 → 20%Bonei Olam Inc: $1k → 20%Bonei Olam Inc: $1k → 20%Bonei Olam Inc: $500 → 20%Bonei Olam Inc: $500 → 20%Bonei Olam: $500 → 20%Bonei Olam: $500 → 20%Bonei Olam: $72 → 20%Kimpatorin Aid Inc: $36 → 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.

65%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$80k · 19 repeat orgs$44k to everyone else

19 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
48

Total granted

$80k
$42k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+24%
+109%

Still filing today

11%
10%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesReligionHealthPhilanthropyPublic BenefitOther
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

  • BO
    Bonei Olam Inc
    6× · 2018–2024 · $4k · revenue +195%
  • CR
    Congregation Rav Lehoshia Inc
    4× · 2021–2024 · $720 · revenue +24%
  • MM
    MATAT MORDECHAI
    2× · 2023–2024 · $72 · revenue +23%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $18k
  • CB
    Cong Bais Shmiel Tzvi
    one grant, 2021 · $4k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $3k
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
Tal Hashamayim Foundation
Religion
2
Chasudim Foundation
—
3
Tzemach Yifroch Foundation
—
4
Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation
Philanthropy
5
Zichron Chaim Meir Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Zichroin Rabbeini Meshilem Feiish Ztl Foundation
—
7
Yad Yosef Foundation
Philanthropy
8
The Yad Moach Vlev Foundation
Philanthropy
9
Meor Hachaim Foundation
Philanthropy
10
Mashiach Foundation
Arts & Culture
11
Zichron Boruch Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
12
Bais Yehuda Perach Rochel Foundation
Public Benefit
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bonei Olam Inc; the most unlike its peers is F F Foundation. 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

12 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. 12 of the 74 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/12
Grantees still filing
8/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Cong Chasdei Ovas Rachmistrivka: $19,000 · OtherCong Chasdei Ovas RachmistrivkaIndividual grant recipient: $18,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientKOLEL ASIKE SHMATASA: $17,000 · OtherKOLEL ASIKE SHMATASARABBINICAL COLLEGE BOBOVER YESHIVA BNEI ZION: $8,045 · OtherRABBINICAL COLLEGE BOBOVER YESHIVA BNEI ZIONCONGREGATION BAIS SHMIEL TZVI: $8,000 · OtherCONGREGATION BAIS SHMIEL TZVIBais Esther School: $7,500 · OtherBais Esther SchoolCong Bais Shmiel Tzvi: $4,000 · Other+57 more: $36,189 · Other+57 moreBonei Olam Inc: $4,072 · Human ServicesA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $260 · Human Services+1 more: $36 · Human ServicesCongregation Rav Lehoshia Inc: $720 · ReligionTHE CHASDEI SHIMON FOUNDATION: $72 · ReligionREFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES: $360 · HealthBIKUR CHOLIM INC: $325 · HealthF F FOUNDATION: $100 · PhilanthropyMATAT MORDECHAI: $72 · PhilanthropyVYAZREIM INC: $50 · Public Benefit
Other$117,734Human Services$4,368Religion$792Health$685Philanthropy$172Public Benefit$50

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 budgetBonei Olam Inc: $4,072 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetCongregation Rav Lehoshia Inc: $720 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetREFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES: $360 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBIKUR CHOLIM INC: $325 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $260 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMATAT MORDECHAI: $72 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CHASDEI SHIMON FOUNDATION: $72 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA TORAS CHAIM INC: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVYAZREIM INC: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKIMPATORIN AID INC: $36 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYL HEARTS Inc: $20 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 Bonei Olam Inc ↗
  • Who funds Congregation Rav Lehoshia Inc ↗
  • Who funds REFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES ↗
  • Who funds BIKUR CHOLIM INC ↗
  • Who funds A Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange ↗

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 FundNY37.3× 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 · Yisnasay Foundation · J & E Wolf Foundation Inc · Yisroel Aryeh and Leib Foundation · Alyad Foundation Inc · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · Bna Charity Foundation Inc · The Etz Chaim Charitable Trust · M & M Fischer Foundation · The Strasbourg Foundation · S&W Foundation Inc

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 Tova Ubrucha 26 Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Tova Ubrucha 26 Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 74 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 Tova Ubrucha 26’s filings →

    More from the funding graph