Loading…

ANNE S RICHARDSON FUND XXXXX3004

Foundation Dossiers

· Private foundation

ANNE S RICHARDSON FUND XXXXX3004

This foundation accepts unsolicited grant applications.

$685k

Granted FY2025

19

Grants

2

Communities

$75k

Largest

01What you fundRead

03Your edgeRead

04Your fieldRead

05Through PlinthRead

01What you fund

01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 60% of ANNE S RICHARDSON FUND XXXXX3004’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2019

women'sridgefield boys

2020

ridgefield boys

2021

ridgefield boys

2022

hallact

2023

act

2024

actmuseum

2025

—

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2025 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

Under $10k1 grant · $5k
$10k–50k12 grants · $290k
$50k–250k6 grants · $390k

$30,000

Median grant

2

States reached

$18M

Total assets

Largest grants

BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF RIDGEFIELD$75,000
RIDGEFIELD PLAYHOUSE FOR MOVIES AND THE$75,000
ST STEPHENS EPISCOPAL CHURCH$70,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTHERN$70,000
VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION OF RIDGEFIELD$50,000
NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN FUND INC$50,000
TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND$45,000
THE RIDGEFIELD LIBRARY AND HISTORIC$40,000
WOMENS BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL INC$40,000
Ridgefield Historical Society$30,000
MAMANASCO LAKE IMPROVEMENT FUND INC$25,000
TRIANGLE COMMUNITY CENTER INC$25,000
MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER$15,000
CONNECTICUT COLLEGE$15,000
NORWALK HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION$15,000

02The need

04

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:

Your human-services grants (FY18–24, $325k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 14%. 28% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — 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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$4.8M · 45 repeat orgs$245k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +31% since the first grant, against +17% for the ones you funded once.

45 repeat relationships — 19 still active in FY2025, 26 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

45

9

Total granted

$4.8M

$245k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%

+17%

Still filing today

51%

67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesArts & CultureEnvironmentEducationRecreation & SportsYouth DevelopmentOther

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

BA
BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF RIDGEFIELD
4× · 2022–2025 · $250k · revenue +118%
VN
VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION OF RIDGEFIELD
6× · 2018–2025 · $225k · revenue +125%
WB
WOMENS BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL INC
5× · 2018–2025 · $190k · revenue +956%

Funded once

KT
KEELER TAVERN MUSEUM RIDGEFIELD
one grant, 2024 · $50k
MR
MILL RIVER COLLABORATIVE INC
one grant, 2023 · $40k · revenue +17%
WC
WOMEN'S CENTER OF GREATER
one grant, 2019 · $35k

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

04Your field

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.

1

Land Conservancy of Ridgefield Inc

The Land Conservancy of Ridgefield, Inc. ("the Land Conservancy"), founded in 1967, preserves and protects, for the general benefit of the public, Ridgefield, Connecticut's natural resources including land and water resources, the plant…

Environment

2

Greenwich Botanical Center Inc

Bba non-profit dedicated to promoting horticulture, conservation and the arts.

Environment

3

Old Greenwichriverside Community Center

To promote a sense of community by providing recreational, athletic, educational, and social programs for our members.

Recreation & Sports

4

Ridgefield Community Kindergarten Inc

To provide preschool education for children ages 2-5.

—

5

The Milford Fine Arts Council Inc

The milford arts council shall support and foster artistic, cultural and educational opportunities for the benefit of the greater milford community through the creation of environments and programs for artists to work, present, and…

—

6

Wethersfield Historical Society

The purpose of the Society is to collect, preserve, and interpret Wethersfield's past for the education and enjoyment of present and future generations.

Arts & Culture

7

Connecticut Aeronautical Historical

To present the story of aviation and the human genius that made it possible

Arts & Culture

8

Greenwich Village Society for

To preserve the architectural heritage and history of greenwich village, the east village, & noho.

—

9

Greenwich Country Club

To maintain a clubhouse and golf grounds; to cultivate a social spirit among its members; to provide them with lawful recreation to do generally whatever may serve for the advancement, benefit, diversion or pleasure of the members.

—

10

University of New Haven

See schedule ouniversity of new haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts & professional education.

Education

11

United Way of Connecticut Inc

The mission of united way of connecticut is to help the people of connecticut to thrive through trusted partnerships and innovative solutions.

Philanthropy

12

Connecticut Public Broadcasting Inc

We are ct's only locally owned media organization producing tv, radio, print and internet content with a mix of educational, new, public affairs, children's and entertainment programming.

Arts & Culture

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mill River Collaborative Inc and the most unlike its peers is Keeler Tavern Preservation Society Inc. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 45 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 9% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/32

the rest of the field

9%

595/6,421

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.

05the grantee network

30 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

3

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

10

Early backer (in before they grew)

29/30

Grantees still filing

24/30

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$3,243,350Arts & Culture$520,000Human Services$325,000Youth Development$320,000Education$310,000Health$155,000Environment$145,000

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.

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.

Fairfield County's Community FoundationCT42.1× affinity18 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fairfield County's Community Foundation · Synchrony Foundation · New Canaan Community Foundation Inc · Connecticut Humanities Council Inc · The Near and Far Association Inc · The Pitney Bowes Foundation · Newman's Own Foundation · Ridgefield Thrift Shop Inc · Ge Foundation · Union Savings Bank Foundation Inc · Philip H and Christine Lodewick · Impact 100 Fairfield County

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 organisation ANNE S RICHARDSON FUND XXXXX3004 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

10get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: RIDGEFIELD GARDEN CLUB.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 061527913 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on RIDGEFIELD GARDEN CLUB, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2025; revenue held over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 57% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Anne S Richardson Fund Xxxxx3004?

Find your warmest path to Anne S Richardson Fund Xxxxx3004 through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

More from the funding graph

The regranting layer

51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary

The DAF merry-go-round

$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds

Strange bedfellows

the named clusters of US funding

funders cluster by geography, not ideology

where grant money is based, and what stays home

State money flows

the interactive map of money crossing state lines