Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Zichron Shimon Charity Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$36k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What you fund
0182% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172024.

Religion$136kArts & Culture$2kPhilanthropy$450Education$250Other$0
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k5 grants · $6k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $30k
$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$184k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
KEREN SHLOMO$19,800
YESHIVA OHR MOLEH KASAAN$10,000
Individual grant recipient$4,300
MERKAZ HAKOLLILIM D'SHIKUN SQUARE$1,000
DAILY GIVING$200
PEYLIM LEV L'ACHIM$180
Individual grant recipient$43
02The need
03

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%MERKAZ HAKOLLILIM D'SHIKUN SQUARE: $1k → 14%YESHIVAS VYELIPOL: $360 → 20%MERCAZ HAKOLELIM DSHIKUN SKVER: $500 → 14%COLEL CHABAD: $360 → 20%MERKAZ HAKOLILIM D SHIKUN SQUARE: $360 → 14%CONG ALIFEI YEHUDA: $7k → 20%MERKAZ HAKOLILIM D SHIKUN SQUARE: $250 → 14%CONG ALIFEI YEHUDA: $4k → 20%CONG ALIFEI YEHUDA: $4k → 20%CONG ALIFEI YEHUDA: $3k → 20%CONG ALIFEI YEHUDA: $2k → 20%TIFERES YITZCHOK: $2k → 20%TIFERES YITZCHOK: $360 → 20%KOLLEL KEHILATH YAKOV: $360 → 20%MISC: $250 → 20%NEVE SHALOM: $35k → 20%CONG BETH HALEVY: $25k → 20%KEREN SHLOMO: $20k → 20%KHAL BRIZDOVITZ: $3k → 20%CONG OHR MOLEH KASSAN: $15k → 20%EMEK HATALMUD: $1k → 20%YESHIVA OHR MOLEH KASSAN: $13k → 20%CONG NACHLAS MOSHE: $1k → 20%CONG ATERES SHALOM: $10k → 20%YESHIVA CHASAN SOFER: $500 → 20%YESHIVA OHR MOLEH KASAAN: $10k → 20%KHAL BRIZDOVITZ: $360 → 20%CONG BAIS HALEVI: $7k → 20%KHAL BRIZDOVITZ: $360 → 20%KEREN SHLOMO: $5k → 20%KHAL BRIZDOVITZ: $360 → 20%KEREN SHLOMO: $2k → 20%KHAL BRIZDOVITZ: $360 → 20%KEREN SHLOMO: $2k → 20%CONG NACHLAS MOSHE: $360 → 20%ZICHRONE SHLOMIE REFUAH FUND: $1k → 20%CONG NACHLAS MOSHE: $360 → 20%KINYAN TORAH FOUNDATION: $648 → 20%CONG NACHLAS MOSHE: $360 → 20%TZIDKAS ERETZ HAKODESH: $500 → 20%YESHIVA CHASAN SOFER: $300 → 20%KEREN MENACHEM: $360 → 20%CONG NACHLAS MOSHE: $250 → 20%KOLLEL POLIN: $250 → 20%BAIS MEDRASH GOVOHA OF ISRAEL: $7k → 20%MOSDOS VERETZKY: $360 → 20%HERITAGE FOUNDATION FOR PRESERVATION OF JEWISH CEMETERIES: $2k → 20%HERITAGE FOUNDATION FOR PRESERVATION OF JEWISH CEMETERIES: $500 → 20%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge
repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

32%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$60k · 8 repeat orgs$130k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +18% since the first grant, against -14% for the ones you funded once.

8 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
26

Total granted

$60k
$119k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
-14%

Still filing today

13%
12%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 71% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
PhilanthropyReligionArts & CultureOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

  • KS
    KEREN SHLOMO
    4× · 2017–2024 · $28k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    5× · 2019–2024 · $19k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    6× · 2017–2022 · $4k

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $35k
  • CB
    CONG BETH HALEVY
    one grant, 2020 · $25k
  • CO
    CONG OHR MOLEH KASSAN
    one grant, 2020 · $15k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
04the grantee network

6 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 6 of the 38 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
2/6
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Individual grant recipient — $35,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientKEREN SHLOMO — $28,400 · OtherKEREN SHLOMOCONG BETH HALEVY — $25,000 · OtherCONG BETH HALEVYIndividual grant recipient — $18,800 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCONG OHR MOLEH KASSAN — $15,000 · OtherCONG OHR MOLEH KASSANYESHIVA OHR MOLEH KASSAN — $13,000 · OtherYESHIVA OHR MOLEH KASSANYESHIVA OHR MOLEH KASAAN — $10,000 · OtherYESHIVA OHR MOLEH KASAANIndividual grant recipient — $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientBAIS MEDRASH GOVOHA OF ISRAEL — $7,070 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $7,000 · Other+23 more — $17,503 · Other+23 moreHERITAGE FOUNDATION FOR PRESERVATI- ON OF THE JEWISH CEMETERIES INC — $2,000 · Arts & CultureKEREN KINYAN TORAH FOUNDATION — $648 · PhilanthropyDAILY GIVING INC — $200 · PhilanthropyYESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK — $250 · ReligionYESHIVA EITZ CHAIM OF HILLSIDE INC — $50 · Religion
Other$186,773Arts & Culture$2,000Philanthropy$848Religion$300

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetHERITAGE FOUNDATION FOR PRESERVATI- ON OF THE JEWISH CEMETERIES INC — $2,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetKEREN KINYAN TORAH FOUNDATION — $648 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetYESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK — $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDAILY GIVING INC — $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPEYLIM LEV LACHIM — $180 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYESHIVA EITZ CHAIM OF HILLSIDE INC — $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds HERITAGE FOUNDATION FOR PRESERVATI- ON OF THE JEWISH CEMETERIES INC
  • Who funds KEREN KINYAN TORAH FOUNDATION
  • Who funds YESHIVA OHR YITZCHOK
  • Who funds DAILY GIVING INC
  • Who funds PEYLIM LEV LACHIM
  • Who funds YESHIVA EITZ CHAIM OF HILLSIDE INC

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Ojc FundNY28.6× affinity13 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ojc Fund · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Zichron Shimon Charity Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 38 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph