· Private foundation
Agape Love Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k12 grants · $33k
- $10k–50k11 grants · $209k
- $50k–250k7 grants · $550k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MT ZION PRAYER CENTER | $103,125 |
| CARE FOR CHILDREN USA | $100,100 |
| LUIS PALAU ASSOCIATION | $100,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES NETWORK | $70,250 |
| SPORTS FAN OUTREACH INT'L | $70,000 |
| CHURCH OF GOD WORLD MISSIONS | $56,780 |
| Individual grant recipient | $50,000 |
| HOPE INTERNATIONAL MISSIONS | $45,000 |
| COAT OF MANY COLORS | $32,500 |
| SAMARITAN'S PURSE | $25,000 |
| CRU | $23,800 |
| VICTORY LIVING WORD CHURCH | $22,500 |
| JABEZ EDUCATION | $10,000 |
| THE 247 MOVEMENT | $10,000 |
| YOUNG LIFE - CHATTANOOGA | $10,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY20–23, $16k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +54% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
29 repeat relationships — 23 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $72k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- LPLuis Palau Association7× · 2017–2024 · $754k · revenue +54%
- CFCARE FOR CHILDREN CARE FOR CHILDREN - USA INC7× · 2018–2024 · $443k · revenue +6%
- IMINTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES NETWORK6× · 2017–2024 · $439k · revenue +64% · 87% of their budget
Funded once
- WWWAILING WOMEN WORLDWIDE USone grant, 2021 · $53k
- CBCROSSNET BAPTIST CHURCHone grant, 2023 · $50k
- NINAUMS INCone grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue -39%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
To reach out with the message of the gospel of jesus to the last, least, and the lost
Since 1816, american bible society has been fulfilling its mission of making the bible available to every person in a language and format each can understand and afford so all people may experience its life-changing message.
The focus of the ministry is to establish christian camps and retreats that will reach men and women who have been affected by post traumatic stress disorder with the gospel of jesus christ, and equip them to recognize, manage, and…
To spread the gospel of jesus christ through crusades
Religious
Jubal band ministries mission is to invite people to become disciples of christian life with jesus.
To proclaim to the world the everlasting gospel of revelation 14:6-12 and to encourage revival in the remnant church by leading people to embrace salvation by faith in jesus, to establish them in the church, and to disciple all believers…
In 2005, medical missions outreach began pointing others to the great physician through an annual medical missions trip to the developing world by partnering with local churches to reach their communities with the gospel. now more than 20…
Supporing missionaries worldwide
The purpose of the organization is to share the passionate love of god the father throughout the world, his salvation through his son, the lord jesus christ, and to lead people to an experience with the holy spirit and his power. our…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Young Life and the most unlike its peers is Museum of the Bible. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 28 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
24 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 2017–2025, 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; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 Luis Palau Association ↗
- Who funds CARE FOR CHILDREN CARE FOR CHILDREN - USA INC ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES NETWORK ↗
- Who funds PROJECT AMAZON ↗
- Who funds YOUNG LIFE ↗
- Who funds THIRD MILLENNIUM MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds SAMARITAN'S PURSE ↗
- Who funds NAUMS INC ↗
- Who funds HELPER CONNECTION INC ↗
- Who funds Andrew Wommack Ministries Inc ↗
- Who funds HEALTHNETWORK FOUNDATION FKA HEALTH NET FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ALLEGRO ORGANIZATIONAL SOLUTIONS INC ↗
- Who funds THE 247 MOVEMENT ↗
- Who funds East-West Ministries International ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Chattanooga Christian Community Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Servant Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Agape Love 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.
- Metropolitan Ministries Inc — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Agape Love Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Agape Love Foundation 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.