Skip to content

· Private foundation

Zichron Eliyahuand Leah Family 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.

$330k
Granted FY2023
11
Grants FY2023
5
States reached
$103k
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

82% of Zichron Eliyahuand Leah Family Foundation’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Donors Fund Inc, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 2 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2023, the last year Zichron Eliyahuand Leah Family Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $330k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

7
’21
3
’22
6
’23
2
’24

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0189% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Religion$602kPhilanthropy$339kHuman Services$18kPublic Safety & Disaster$15kArts & Culture$10kEducation$8kInternational$5kOther$0
02FY2023 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k3 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $138k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $173k
$25,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$110k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Chabad of Sacramento$102,500
Donors Fund Inc$70,000
Talmud Torah Chochmas Shlomo$31,040
Congregation Bais Medrash Kerem Shl$30,000
Individual grant recipient$25,000
Valley of the Sun JCC$25,000
Hatzalah of Michigan$15,000
Congregation Beth Tefilo Emanuel Ti$12,000
Keren L Torah$9,000
Small Donations to Various 501c3 cl$5,700
TEP$5,000
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 (FY21–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 83% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Valley of the Sun JCC: $25k → 11%Chabad of Sacramento: $103k → 12%Hatzolah Air: $25k → 13%KYZZ: $10k → 14%Talmud Torah Chochmas Shlomo: $31k → 17%The Gelt Charitable Contribution: $5k → 11%Yeshiva Gedolah Ateres Mordechai: $30k → 8%Donors Fund Inc: $220k → 11%Bais Medrash Letorah: $30k → 19%Chabad of Sacramento: $83k → 12%Ohr Somayach: $7k → 14%Hatzalah of Michigan: $15k → 8%Donors Fund Inc: $70k → 11%American Friends of Yeshivat Zichro: $30k → 19%Chabad of Sacramento: $64k → 12%Kollel Zichron Menachem: $5k → 14%TEP: $10k → 8%Congregation Bais Medrash Kerem Shl: $30k → 11%Chabad of Sacramento: $44k → 12%Lubavitch Cheder: $8k → 8%Congregation Bais Medrash Kerem Shl: $30k → 11%TEP: $5k → 8%Congregation Ohavei Torah: $18k → 11%TEP: $2k → 8%Congregation Kol Aryeh: $10k → 11%Small Donations to Various 501c3 cl: $31k → 8%Freehold Kollel: $8k → 11%Kollel Choshen Mishpot: $20k → 8%Mesivta of Eatontown: $6k → 11%Matan B'seter: $18k → 8%American Friends of Ramat Bais Shem: $5k → 11%Congregation Beth Tefilo Emanuel Ti: $12k → 8%Keren L Torah: $9k → 8%Small Donations to Various 501c3 cl: $7k → 8%Small Donations to Various 501c3 cl: $6k → 8%Keren L Torah: $2k → 8%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 100% of Zichron Eliyahuand Leah Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 17% of the giving stays in MI; by stated purpose, 0%.

Zichron Eliyahuand Leah Family Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

57%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$424k · 5 repeat orgs$325k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2023, 0 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call). Read against FY2023, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
16

Total granted

$424k
$217k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-95%
+45%

Still filing today

20%
31%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
ReligionEducationInternationalPublic Safety & DisasterOther
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

  • CO
    CHABAD OF SACRAMENTO
    4× · 2021–2024 · $293k
  • CB
    CONGREGATION BAIS MEDRASH KEREM SHLOMO INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $60k
  • SD
    Small Donations to Various 501c3 cl
    3× · 2021–2023 · $44k

Funded once

  • YG
    Yeshiva Gedolah Ateres Mordechai
    one grant, 2021 · $30k
  • BM
    Bais Medrash Letorah
    one grant, 2021 · $30k
  • AF
    American Friends of Yeshivat Zichro
    one grant, 2021 · $30k
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
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
2
Milwaukee Kollel Inc

Advanced torah studies.

Religion
3
Yeshiva Beit Rafael

Religious & charitable- to provide funds to enable the study of torah.

Philanthropy
4
Tomchei Torah Inc

Religious Teaching

—
5
Pittsburgh Kollel Bais Yitzchok

Advanced rabbinical training in talmud, jewish philosophy, outreach to the community.

—
6
Yeshiva Gedolah Rabbinical College Inc

Provide college level education and extensive background of jewish law and talmudic studies and rabbinical ordination.

Education
7
Kollel Ohr Shmuel Inc

To learn, spread, and study torah

Religion
8
Merkaz Hatorah Community Kollel

Advance study of the talmud and jewish law by torah scholars

Religion
9
Bet Midrash Ohel Torah

Operation of a post-secondary educational institution providing rabbinical training with a focus on sephardic/middle eastern jewish tradition.

Education
10
Kollel Nefesh Hachaim Inc
Education
11
Friends of Yeshiva Tehilas Shlomo Inc

Provide support to further jewish education

Philanthropy
12
Kollel Ohr Hatorah Inc

To expand torah education

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Talmud Torah Chochmas Shlomo; the most unlike its peers is Rabbinical College of America. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

10 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. 10 of the 27 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)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHABAD OF SACRAMENTO: $293,000 · OtherCHABAD OF SACRAMENTOCONGREGATION BAIS MEDRASH KEREM SHLOMO INC: $60,000 · OtherCONGREGATION BAIS MEDRASH KEREM SHLOMO INCSmall Donations to Various 501c3 cl: $43,878 · OtherSmall Donations to Various 501c3 clYeshiva Gedolah Ateres Mordechai: $30,000 · OtherBais Medrash Letorah: $30,000 · OtherAmerican Friends of Yeshivat Zichro: $30,000 · OtherVALLEY OF THE SUN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $25,000 · Other+11 more: $115,300 · Other+11 moreDONORS FUND INC: $290,000 · PhilanthropyDONORS FUND INCTALMUD TORAH CHOCHMAS SHLOMO: $31,040 · ReligionKOLLEL CHOSHEN MISHPAT: $20,400 · ReligionKEREN L'TORAH: $10,500 · ReligionHATZALAH OF MICHIGAN: $15,000 · Public Safety & DisasterOholei Yosef Yitzchak Lubavitch: $8,000 · EducationRABBINICAL COLLEGE OF AMERICA: $6,400 · EducationAMERICAN FRIENDS OF RAMAT BET SHEMESH INC: $5,000 · International
Other$652,178Philanthropy$290,000Religion$61,940Public Safety & Disaster$15,000Education$14,400International$5,000

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 budgetDONORS FUND INC: $290,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTALMUD TORAH CHOCHMAS SHLOMO: $31,040 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetVALLEY OF THE SUN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetKOLLEL CHOSHEN MISHPAT: $20,400 over 1y, 14% of budgetMATAN BSETER: $18,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetHATZALAH OF MICHIGAN: $15,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetKEREN L'TORAH: $10,500 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetOholei Yosef Yitzchak Lubavitch: $8,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetRABBINICAL COLLEGE OF AMERICA: $6,400 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF RAMAT BET SHEMESH INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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 DONORS FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds TALMUD TORAH CHOCHMAS SHLOMO ↗
  • Who funds VALLEY OF THE SUN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds KOLLEL CHOSHEN MISHPAT ↗
  • Who funds MATAN BSETER ↗
  • Who funds HATZALAH OF MICHIGAN ↗
  • Who funds KEREN L'TORAH ↗
  • Who funds Oholei Yosef Yitzchak Lubavitch ↗
  • Who funds RABBINICAL COLLEGE OF AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF RAMAT BET SHEMESH INC ↗

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 FundNY16.3× affinity7 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · The Ojc Fund · The Meer Family Foundation · Ahavas Avraham Foundation · Nash Charity Foundation Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Eliyahuand Leah Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Zichron Eliyahuand Leah Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 20%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
  • Rabbinical College of America: 5% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get 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 · 0–25%
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 27 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Zichron Eliyahuand Leah Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph