Skip to content
Wmm Charitable Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Wmm Charitable Foundation Inc

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.

$252k
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$53k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Religion$2.0MEducation$394kPhilanthropy$313kInternational$220kHealth$189k
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k9 grants · $32k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $168k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $53k
$4,202
Median grant
3
States reached
$366k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ZICHRON MENACHEM INC$52,500
FRISCH SCHOOL$40,000
CHICAGO COMMUNITY KOLLEL$40,000
PROJECT GENESIS$30,000
RUTGERS UNIVERSITY$18,000
RABBI ISAAC ELCHANAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINAR$15,000
AHAVAS CHAIM$14,000
TOURO$11,000
DONATIONS UNDER 1000$4,202
CONGREGATION SHOMREI TORAH CHARITY FUND$4,148
CHABAD$4,000
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVAS TORAS MOSHE$3,750
NOAM$3,600
YESHIVAT ASHREINU INC$3,500
Individual grant recipient$3,300
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 (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 48% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%ISRAEL CONSENSUS PROJECT: $90k → 9%ZICHRON MENACHEM INC: $127k → 14%OHR TORAH: $160k → 6%ISRAEL CONSENSUS PROJECT: $75k → 9%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF KEHILLAS SIMCHAS HAT: $30k → 13%ZICHRON MENACHEM INC: $106k → 14%FRISCH SCHOOL: $40k → 7%PROJECT GENESIS: $30k → 11%OHR TORAH: $150k → 6%ISRAEL CONSENSUS PROJECT: $25k → 9%ZICHRON MENACHEM INC: $91k → 14%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVAS TORAS MOSHE: $20k → 20%FRISCH SCHOOL: $40k → 7%ISRAEL CONSENSUS PROJECT: $25k → 9%CHICAGO COMMUNITY KOLLEL: $89k → 14%NOAM: $33k → 7%YESHIVAT AISH HATORAH: $29k → 12%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF TIFERET CENTER: $32k → 6%ZICHRON MENACHEM INC: $88k → 14%FRISCH SCHOOL: $32k → 7%ZICHRON MENACHEM INC: $83k → 14%FRISCH SCHOOL: $27k → 7%TORAT SHRAGA: $19k → 6%CHICAGO COMMUNITY KOLLEL: $68k → 14%FRISCH SCHOOL: $27k → 7%CHICAGO COMMUNITY KOLLEL: $53k → 14%RABBI ISAAC ELCHANAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINAR: $35k → 17%YESHIVA OF BERGEN COUNTY INC NOAM: $23k → 7%CHICAGO COMMUNITY KOLLEL: $53k → 14%RABBI ISAAC ELCHANAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINAR: $20k → 17%FRISCH SCHOOL: $22k → 7%ZICHRON MENACHEM INC: $53k → 14%RABBI ISAAC ELCHANAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINAR: $20k → 17%SINAI SPECIAL NEEDS INSTITUTE: $21k → 7%CHICAGO COMMUNITY KOLLEL: $51k → 14%NOAM: $19k → 7%CHICAGO COMMUNITY KOLLEL: $40k → 14%UNION OF ORTHODOX CONGS OF AMERICA: $48k → 17%UNION OF ORTHODOX CONGS OF AMERICA: $30k → 17%YESHIVAT LEV HATORAH: $20k → 7%UNION OF ORTHODOX CONGS OF AMERICA: $29k → 17%UNION OF ORTHODOX CONGS OF AMERICA NCSY: $26k → 17%IN OUR HEARTS PROJECT: $62k → 7%IN OUR HEARTS PROJECT: $49k → 7%LISHIS LOVE: $47k → 7%LISHIS LOVE: $45k → 7%IN OUR HEARTS PROJECT: $43k → 7%CONGREGATION SHOMREI TORAH CHARITY FUND: $30k → 7%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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.8M · 31 repeat orgs$230k to everyone else

31 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

31
27

Total granted

$2.8M
$171k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+29%
+78%

Still filing today

45%
22%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 77% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $59k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationInternationalReligionPhilanthropyRecreation & SportsHealthOther
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

  • TF
    The Frisch School
    6× · 2020–2025 · $187k · revenue +39%
  • RI
    RABBI ISAAC ELCHANAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
    6× · 2020–2025 · $115k · revenue +42%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF TIFERET CENTER
    2× · 2023–2024 · $47k · revenue +4%

Funded once

  • UO
    UNION OF ORTHODOX CONGS OF AMERICA NCSY
    one grant, 2020 · $26k
  • YN
    YESHIVAT NOAMgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $23k · revenue +27%
  • YL
    YESHIVAT LEV HATORAH
    one grant, 2021 · $20k
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
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
3
American Friends of Amshinover Yeshiva Jerusalem Inc

Support of religious schools in Israel

International
4
American Friends of Yeshiva Aish Hatorah
—
5
Sherit Isroel
—
6
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
7
Kollel Nefesh Hachaim Inc
Education
8
Yeshiva Keren Hatorah of Passaic- Clifton

To operate a high school offering religious instruction and general studies as well as a post high school program of talmudic studies. the school shall be run under the standards of orthodox jewish law and tradition.

Education
9
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
10
Keren Yaakov Ben Menachen Tzvi Foundation
Philanthropy
11
Chevras Shabbos Kodesh Podcast Fellowship
Religion
12
Yeshiva Derech Hatorah-Yeshivat Mizrachi Lbanim

A school-section 170(b)(1)(a)(ii), operating from the preschool pre-k level through high school, and chartered ny the new york state education department and board of regents.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Yeshiva High School for Girls Inc; the most unlike its peers is Hebron Fund 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

24 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. 24 of the 62 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/24
Grantees still filing
19/24
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ZICHRON MENACHEM INC: $547,300 · OtherZICHRON MENACHEM INCCHICAGO COMMUNITY KOLLEL INC: $353,500 · OtherCHICAGO COMMUNITY KOLLEL INCOHR TORAH: $320,000 · OtherOHR TORAHISRAEL CONSENSUS PROJECT INC: $215,000 · OtherISRAEL CONSENSUS PROJECT INCIN OUR HEARTS PROJECT INC: $175,100 · OtherIN OUR HEARTS PROJECT INCIndividual grant recipient: $122,000 · OtherUNION OF ORTHODOX CONGS OF AMERICA: $112,716 · Other+33 more: $474,970 · Other+33 moreThe Frisch School: $186,900 · EducationThe Frisch Schoo…RABBI ISAAC ELCHANAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: $114,500 · EducationRABBI ISAAC ELCH…YESHIVAT AISH HATORAH: $44,750 · EducationYESHIVAT AISH HA…YESHIVA HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS INC: $32,700 · EducationYESHIVA HIGH SCH…YESHIVA UNIVERSITY: $23,300 · EducationYESHIVAT NOAM: $22,500 · Education+2 more: $18,248 · EducationAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVAS TORAS MOSHE: $56,750 · InternationalTorat Shraga Inc: $41,000 · InternationalAmerican Friends of Kehillas Simchas Hatorah Inc: $31,000 · International+2 more: $4,850 · InternationalAMERICAN FRIENDS OF TIFERET CENTER: $47,000 · ReligionPROJECT GENESIS INC: $30,000 · ReligionAMERICAN FRIENDS OF OHR SOMAYACH INC: $17,500 · ReligionAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BIRCHAS MORDECHAI: $12,900 · ReligionHAMESIVTA OF MONSEY: $5,000 · ReligionYeshivat Ashreinu Inc: $46,000 · PhilanthropyHEBRON FUND INC: $3,000 · PhilanthropyAHAVAS CHAIM INC: $14,000 · HealthCAMP HACHSHARA-MOSHAVA OF NY INC: $1,000 · Recreation & Sports
Other$2,320,586Education$442,898International$133,600Religion$112,400Philanthropy$49,000Health$14,000Recreation & Sports$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetISRAEL CONSENSUS PROJECT INC: $215,000 over 4y, 63% of budgetThe Frisch School: $186,900 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetRABBI ISAAC ELCHANAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: $114,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVAS TORAS MOSHE: $56,750 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF TIFERET CENTER: $47,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetYeshivat Ashreinu Inc: $46,000 over 6y, 0.9% of budgetYESHIVAT AISH HATORAH: $44,750 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetTorat Shraga Inc: $41,000 over 3y, 3.0% of budgetSINAI SPECIAL NEEDS INSTITUTE INC: $36,360 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetYESHIVA HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS INC: $32,700 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetAmerican Friends of Kehillas Simchas Hatorah Inc: $31,000 over 2y, 16% of budgetYESHIVA UNIVERSITY: $23,300 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVAT NOAM: $22,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF OHR SOMAYACH INC: $17,500 over 2y, 49% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF MOUNT SAINT VINCENT: $13,248 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BIRCHAS MORDECHAI: $12,900 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetPASSAIC HEBREW INSTITUTE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCentral Fund of Israel: $3,600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHEBRON FUND INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH YEAR ABROAD: $1,250 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCAMP HACHSHARA-MOSHAVA OF NY INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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 ISRAEL CONSENSUS PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds The Frisch School ↗
  • Who funds RABBI ISAAC ELCHANAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF YESHIVAS TORAS MOSHE ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF TIFERET CENTER ↗
  • Who funds Yeshivat Ashreinu Inc ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVAT AISH HATORAH ↗
  • Who funds Torat Shraga Inc ↗
  • Who funds SINAI SPECIAL NEEDS INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS INC ↗
  • Who funds American Friends of Kehillas Simchas Hatorah Inc ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT GENESIS INC ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVA UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds YESHIVAT NOAM ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF OHR SOMAYACH INC ↗
  • Who funds AHAVAS CHAIM INC ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF MOUNT SAINT VINCENT ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BIRCHAS MORDECHAI ↗

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.

Jewish Communal FundFjcThe Ojc FundCenter for Initiative…The Ohr Hakotel Found…Jewish Community Foun…The Blumenfeld Family…The Kahan Family Foun…George and Ellen Frie…The Slomo and Cindy S…Jewish Federation of …Toras Chesed Inc
Jewish Communal FundNY33.5× affinity21 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · Fjc · The Ojc Fund · Center for Initiatives in Jewish Education · The Ohr Hakotel Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · The Blumenfeld Family Foundation · The Kahan Family Foundation · George and Ellen Friedman Family Foundation · The Slomo and Cindy Silvian Foundation Inc · Jewish Federation of Northern New Jersey Inc · Toras Chesed 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 Wmm Charitable Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Wmm Charitable Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Yeshiva High School for Girls Inc: 1% of income from government
  • The Frisch School: 0% 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 · 0–15%
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 Wmm Charitable Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Wmm Charitable Foundation Inc 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 62 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 Wmm’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home