Skip to content

· Public charity

Tzidkas Binyomin Inc

Tzidkas Binyamin is organized for charitable, religious and educational purposes, to assist Jewish orthodox institutions and needy individuals in need of financial aid.

$361k
Granted FY2022
4
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$17k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2022.

Religion$120k
02FY2022 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $46,790, the rows itemized in this filing. The $360,550 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $313,760 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 · FY2022

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $34k
$17,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$122k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Cong Zichron Menachem$17,200
Cong Achiezer KY$17,000
Cong Khal Derech Emes$7,000
Zichron Avoseinei$5,590
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 (FY17–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%Cong Achiezer KY: $26k → 14%Cong Achiezer KY: $17k → 14%Zichron Avoseinei: $30k → 20%Cong Zichron Menachem: $17k → 14%Zichron Avoseinei: $6k → 20%Cong Khal Derech Emes: $7k → 14%Yeshivas Viznitz: $6k → 14%Yeshivas Viznitz: $6k → 14%Yeshivas Viznitz: $6k → 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 field
04the grantee network

0 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2022.

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 2022, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 0 of the 5 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
0/0
Grantees still filing
0/0
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONG ACHIEZER KY: $42,500 · OtherCONG ACHIEZER KYZICHRON AVOSEINEI: $35,590 · OtherZICHRON AVOSEINEIYESHIVATH VIZNITZ DKHAL TORATH CHAIM INC: $18,000 · OtherYESHIVATH VIZNITZ DKHAL TORATH CHAIM INCZICHRON MENACHEM INC: $17,200 · OtherZICHRON MENACHEM INCCONGREGATION DERECH EMES OF WESLEY HILLS: $7,000 · OtherCONGREGATION DERECH EMES OF WESLEY HILLS
Other$120,290

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

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their 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.

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 FundNY13.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift 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.

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 5 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Tzidkas Binyomin’s filings →

More from the funding graph