Skip to content

· Private foundation

Zichron Ayol 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.

$1k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$1k
Largest
01What it funds
0159% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$15kEducation$186Health$162Human Services$135Philanthropy$108Arts & Culture$72Public Safety & Disaster$36Other$0
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,221
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VARIOUS CONTRIBUTIONS LESS THAN 1500$1,221
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 (FY19–21, $207) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 83% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%Oorah: $25 → 11%Oorah: $10 → 11%MY EXTENDED FAMILY: $100 → 20%Atime: $72 → 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.

50%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$16k · 6 repeat orgs$17k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +45% since the first grant, against +43% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
54

Total granted

$16k
$17k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+45%
+43%

Still filing today

17%
13%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
Human ServicesHealthEducationPublic Safety & DisasterPhilanthropyOther
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

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    5× · 2017–2023 · $10k
  • VC
    VARIOUS CONTRIBUTIONS LESS THAN 1500
    3× · 2022–2024 · $3k
  • CV
    CHONEN VNOSEN
    3× · 2018–2021 · $2k

Funded once

  • KV
    KEREN VEZER INC KEREN EZER
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
  • UT
    UNITED TALMUDIC ACADEMY
    one grant, 2022 · $4k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $2k
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
Tzohar Halev Inc

Support of tzohar-a school for special needs children located in israel

Education
2
American Friends of Oseh Chayil

To further jewish education in israel

Religion
3
Aviv Ha Torah

Provides day care in the heart of tel-aviv. provides afternoon activities for young children and youth. there are evening classes for adults covering a variety of subjects.

International
4
Chaverim Israel Family Services Inc

To provide medical support to families in need

Employment
5
Hashevaynu Inc

The furthurance of jewish concepts and religious beliefs.

Education
6
Shaarei Halacha Inc
Philanthropy
7
Chevrah Lomdei Mishnah Inc

Promoting study of Mishnah and other Jewish texts

Religion
8
American Friends of Tzohar

Support of tzohar-a school for special needs children located in israel

—
9
Beis Hachinuch Inc

To provide hebrew religious and secular education for elementary children in a warm and nurturing environment

Education
10
Ahavas Torah V'chesed
Philanthropy
11
Lev Chabad Inc

To support religious outreach by providing support to lev chabad in israel and other organizations

Health
12
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chai Lifeline Inc; the most unlike its peers is Hatzolah of Williamsburg 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

8 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. 8 of the 60 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)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $9,958 · OtherIndividual grant recipientKEREN VEZER INC KEREN EZER: $5,000 · OtherKEREN VEZER INC KEREN EZERUNITED TALMUDIC ACADEMY: $3,500 · OtherUNITED TALMUDIC ACADEMYVARIOUS CONTRIBUTIONS LESS THAN 1500: $2,912 · OtherVARIOUS CONTRIBUTIONS LESS THAN 1500CHONEN VNOSEN: $2,268 · OtherCHONEN VNOSENIndividual grant recipient: $2,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+46 more: $6,989 · Other+46 moreMY EXTENDED FAMILY INC: $100 · Human ServicesA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $72 · Human ServicesOORAH INC: $35 · Human ServicesLAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC: $136 · EducationREFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES: $36 · HealthCHAI LIFELINE INC: $18 · HealthHATZOLAH OF WILLIAMSBURG INC: $36 · Public Safety & DisasterAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BNAI LEVY FOUNDATION: $18 · Philanthropy
Other$32,627Human Services$207Education$136Health$54Public Safety & Disaster$36Philanthropy$18

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 budgetLAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC: $136 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMY EXTENDED FAMILY INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetA Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange: $72 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetREFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES: $36 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHATZOLAH OF WILLIAMSBURG INC: $36 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOORAH INC: $35 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BNAI LEVY FOUNDATION: $18 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $18 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 LAKEWOOD CHEDER SCHOOL INC ↗
  • Who funds MY EXTENDED FAMILY INC ↗
  • Who funds A Torah Infertilty Medium Exchange ↗
  • Who funds REFUAH HELPLINE INCDBA REFUAH RESOURCES ↗

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 FundNY28.1× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Sbt Foundation · Zelig and Rifky Weiss Family Foundation Inc · The Lexicon Foundation Inc · Srs Foundation · Kanfei Yoneh Foundation · Mkz Charity Foundation Inc · Vyazreim Inc · American Friends of Bnai Levy Foundation · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal 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 Zichron Ayol Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Zichron Ayol Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Oorah Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get 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 · 0–5%
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 60 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 Zichron Ayol’s filings →

More from the funding graph