· Public charity
Ala-Tom RC&D Council Inc
Resource conservation and development
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.
The 42 grants below total $447,194 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $634,664 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $187,470 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k25 grants · $179k
- $10k–50k17 grants · $268k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| AUBURN UNIVERSITY | $31,131 |
| HILCREST HIGH SCHOOL | $26,514 |
| SELMA DALLAS COUNTY RESCUE SQUAD | $25,000 |
| CITY OF MARION | $20,000 |
| MILLRY HIGH SCHOOL | $16,684 |
| BREAKTHROUGH CHARTER SCHOOL | $16,057 |
| CLARKE COUNTY COMMISSION | $15,672 |
| WASHUINGTON COUNTTY HIGH SCHOOL | $15,000 |
| ALABAMA TOMBIGBEE REGIONAL COMMISSION | $15,000 |
| THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA | $15,000 |
| PRESTWICK COMMUNITY OUTREACH | $11,123 |
| SELMA POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE | $10,374 |
| CITY OF DEMOPOLIS FIRE & RESCUE | $10,123 |
| CAMDEN COMMUNITY YOUTH DEVELOPMENT CENTER | $10,086 |
| CONECUH COUNTY SOILD & WTER DISTRICT | $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 (FY19–24, $79k) land where the poverty rate runs at 23%, against an area that typically sits at 16%. 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.
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 +43% since the first grant, against +37% for the ones you funded once.
32 repeat relationships — 17 still active in FY2024, 15 since wound down; 24 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, 43% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $257k 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
- MMMarion Military Institute Foundation4× · 2020–2023 · $125k · revenue +17%
- FAF A I T H GROCERIES4× · 2019–2024 · $31k · revenue +2% · 27% of their budget
- TLTHE LIBERTY LEARNING FOUNDATION3× · 2019–2024 · $23k · revenue +65%
Funded once
- WCWASHINGTON COUNTY COMMISSIONone grant, 2022 · $50k
- CFCahaba Foundation Incgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $30k · revenue +37% · 31% of their budget
- MCMARION-PERRY COUNTY LIBRARYone grant, 2022 · $16k
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.
Social services
Preserve the history of shelby county al
Provide services and support to prevent cruelty and provide shelter to animals
Central Alabama Pride is dedicated to promoting equality, unity, and visibility for the LGBTQ+ community in Central Alabama.
The mission of the organization is to reduce the effects of proverty in walker county, al
Assistance to veterans especially in alabama
Landmarks of dekalb county, inc was created for the purpose of sharing and preserving the history of the people and places in dekalb county, alabama.
To facilitate implementation of workforce development programs andservices that support economic and job development in the region andthat address the workforce needs of existing businesses and industry.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Blackbelt Regional Child Advocacy Center and the most unlike its peers is Arsenal Place Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 14 years old; the field is 19. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 20% of your grantees by number, and just 18% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 16% 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.
32 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. 32 of the 100 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 Marion Military Institute Foundation ↗
- Who funds BREAKTHROUGH CHARTER SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds F A I T H GROCERIES ↗
- Who funds Cahaba Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds ALL 4 PAWS ↗
- Who funds THE LIBERTY LEARNING FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MOWA BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIAN COMMISSION ↗
- Who funds SELMA AREA FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds Central Alabama Regional Child Advocacy Center ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SOUTHWEST ALABAMA INC ↗
- Who funds Arsenal Place 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.
Open a dossier: Alabama Power Foundation Inc · The Daniel Foundation of Alabama · Mike and Gillian Goodrich Foundation · Alabama Association of Resource Conservation and Development Councils · The Black Belt Community Foundation Inc · Alabama Humanities Alliance · International Paper Company Foundation · Alfa Foundation · Walker Area Community Foundation Inc · Weaver-Parrish Charitable Trust · The Community Foundation of Greater Birmingham · Share Our Strength
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 Ala-Tom RC&D Council Inc 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.
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 Ala-Tom RC&D Council Inc?
Find your warmest path to Ala-Tom RC&D Council Inc 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.