Skip to content
Zichron Shaul Veliba Baum Charitabl Fund Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Zichron Shaul Veliba Baum Charitabl Fund 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.

$22k
Granted FY2023
5
Grants FY2023
2
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Religion$81kEducation$12kFood & Nutrition$7kHuman Services$2kArts & Culture$1kYouth Development$250Health$250Recreation & Sports$200Other$0
02FY2023 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k4 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$3,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$238k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
KOLLEL B'NAI YESHIVOS$10,000
Individual grant recipient$4,000
EIN OD MILVADO$3,000
YESHIVA KARLIN STOLIN$2,500
YESHIVA GEDOLAH NER MESHULEM$2,000
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 (FY17–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF NER YAAKOV: $250 → 6%CONGREGATION YESHUOS YAAKOV: $500 → 14%CONGREGATION ANSHEI FALLSBURG: $3k → 16%YESHIVA GEDOLAH NER MESHULEM: $2k → 20%TELSHE ALUMNI GEMILUS CHESED FUND: $1k → 17%CHAZKEINU: $2k → 14%EIN OD MILVADO: $4k → 11%CONGREGATION ZICHRON MORDECHAI: $500 → 14%YESHIVA GEDOLAH ZICHRON MOSHE: $1k → 16%KEREN YAGDIL TORAH: $1k → 20%CONGREGATION ANSHEI RIDGE: $3k → 11%ZICHRON MENACHEM: $360 → 14%EIN OD MILVADO: $3k → 11%CONGREGATION BAIS AHARON D'KARLIN: $250 → 14%KEREN YAGDIL TORAH: $910 → 20%CONGREGATION ZICHRON BINYOMIN: $3k → 11%BAIS DOVID: $250 → 14%CONGREGATION ZICHRON MOSHE: $1k → 11%KEREN YAGDIL TORAH: $500 → 20%CONGREGATION FOREST GLEN: $500 → 11%CONGREGATION KEREN HAGMACH: $4k → 20%CONGREGATION ZICHRON BINYOMIN: $500 → 11%CONG KEREN HAGMACH: $4k → 20%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE SUNDERLAND KOLLEL: $500 → 11%ZICHRON AVOT: $4k → 20%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE SUNDERLAND KOLLEL: $300 → 11%OTSAR HACHESED: $4k → 20%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE SUNDERLAND KOLLEL: $250 → 11%OTSAR HACHESED: $4k → 20%CONGREGATION B'NAI YAAKOV: $500 → 20%ZICHRON AVOT: $4k → 20%CONGREGATION B'NAI YAAKOV: $400 → 20%CONGREGATION KEREN HAGMACH: $3k → 20%YESHIVA KARLIN STOLIN: $4k → 20%YESHIVA KARLIN STOLIN: $4k → 20%CONGREGATION SHEM M'SHMUEL: $3k → 20%YESHIVA KARLIN STOLIN: $3k → 20%MERCAZ OLAMI: $3k → 20%CONGREGATION RUACH CHAIM: $500 → 20%CONGREGATION AHAVAS TZEDAKAH VACHESED: $1k → 20%CONGREGATION HISACHUS HATALMIDIM: $360 → 20%ZICHRON ELIYAHU: $1k → 20%ZICHRON ELIYAHU: $500 → 20%HACHNASSAS KALLAH VE'EZRA: $300 → 20%KOLLEL B'NAI YESHIVOS: $20k → 20%KOLLEL B'NAI YESHIVOS: $10k → 20%CONGREGATION YESHUOS CHAIM: $500 → 20%YESHIVA KETANA OF BENSONHURST: $500 → 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.

73%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$79k · 13 repeat orgs$30k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2023, 10 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
31

Total granted

$79k
$24k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-23%
+65%

Still filing today

8%
3%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 72% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time
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

  • KB
    KOLLEL BNEI YESHIVAS
    2× · 2022–2023 · $30k
  • YK
    YESHIVA KARLIN STOLIN
    3× · 2019–2023 · $10k
  • EO
    EIN OD MILVADO
    3× · 2017–2023 · $7k

Funded once

  • CA
    CONGREGATION ANSHEI RIDGE
    one grant, 2018 · $3k
  • CA
    CONGREGATION ANSHI FALLSBURG
    one grant, 2018 · $3k
  • CS
    CONGREGATION SHEM MSHMUEL
    one grant, 2018 · $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
04the grantee network

2 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2024.

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 2024, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 2 of the 46 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
2/2
Grantees still filing
1/2
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

KOLLEL BNEI YESHIVAS: $30,000 · OtherKOLLEL BNEI YESHIVASYESHIVA KARLIN STOLIN: $9,700 · OtherYESHIVA KARLIN STOLINEIN OD MILVADO: $7,250 · OtherEIN OD MILVADOIndividual grant recipient: $7,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientZICHRON AVOT: $7,000 · OtherZICHRON AVOTCONGREGATION KEREN HAGEMACH: $7,000 · OtherCONGREGATION KEREN HAGEMACHIndividual grant recipient: $4,000 · Other+38 more: $34,585 · Other+38 moreZICHRON ELIYAHU INC: $1,500 · Religion
Other$106,535Religion$1,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetZICHRON ELIYAHU INC: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF NER YAAKOV INC: $250 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 ZICHRON ELIYAHU INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF NER YAAKOV 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.

The Ojc FundJack Adjmi Family Fou…Toras Chesed IncZichron Yechiel Meche…Jewish Communal FundZichron Chaim Charity…Donors Fund IncThe Moshe and Frady K…Grant Recommendation …The R & S Family Foun…Regina Goldwasser Fou…Zichron Btz Tzedakah …
The Ojc FundNY41× affinity22 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 · Toras Chesed Inc · Zichron Yechiel Mechel Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · Donors Fund Inc · The Moshe and Frady Kalter Foundation Inc C/O Moshe Kalter · Grant Recommendation Fund · The R & S Family Foundation Inc · Regina Goldwasser Foundation · Zichron Btz Tzedakah 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 Shaul Veliba Baum Charitabl Fund Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Zichron Shaul Veliba Baum Charitabl Fund Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 46 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.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record but names no grant recipient in the published copy, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Zichron Shaul Veliba Baum Charitabl’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