· Public charity
Api Chaya
API CHAYA empowers survivors of gender-based violence and human trafficking to gain safety, connection, and wellness.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 2 grants below total $84,699 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $957,995 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $873,296 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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WHITE CENTER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION | $44,699 |
| MULTI COMMUNITIES | $40,000 |
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 (FY18–19, $26k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +459% since the first grant, against +156% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 1 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, 47% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $45k 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
RVC SEATTLE3× · 2018–2021 · $177k · revenue +459%- MMULTI-COMMUNITIES2× · 2022–2024 · $65k · revenue +61%
- UTUNITED TERRITORIES OF PACIFIC ISLANDERS WASHINGTON-UTOPIA WA2× · 2018–2019 · $26k · revenue ×14
Funded once
- UOUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTONone grant, 2018 · $15k
- GCGAY CITY HEALTH PROJECTgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $15k · revenue +156%
MOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTERone grant, 2023 · $15k · revenue -32%
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.
Queer Power Alliance is rooted in the LGBTQIA+ community and in solidarity with other marginalized communities. We strive for equity by disrupting systems of oppression holding back LGBTQIA+ communities through advocating, educating,…
Washington Indian Civil Rights Commission is led by and for Indigenous people, and envisions a just society in which we are treated with honor, fairness and respect. Our mission is to uphold our individual civil rights through education…
Gender Justice League's mission is to empower all people to eliminate discrimination and prejudice based on sex, gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation in Washington State, and to ensure that trans and gender diverse…
The Northwest Network of Bisexual Trans Lesbians and Gay Survivors of Abuse supports queer and trans survivors in reconnecting to their self-determination through advocacy-based counseling and community education.
The Oakland LGBTQ Community Center is dedicated to enhancing and sustaining the well-being of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) individuals, our families and allies, by providing educational, social, and health related…
Washington Community Alliance WCA is a statewide network of over 70 organizations working to advance multiracial social democracy by coordinating values aligned civic engagement
To combine business development, leadership and social action to expand economic opportunities for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer community and those who support equality for all.
We are workers, united across different industries to improve our working conditions and our lives. We come together as working people to build power through education, organizing, and enforcement. We work to raise and uphold standards in…
Through education advocacy and celebration The Rainbow Center expands resources and safe space for lesbian gay bisexual transgender queer and allied community.
Rainier Beach Action Coalition is a grassroot, Black-led organization devoted to locally driven development. It promotes quality education, living wage jobs, affordable transportation and housing, and building community capacity in…
The Center works to create a region where all LGBTQ+ people thrive; we support health and wellness,advocate for equity and justice, and work to uplift our diverse and culturally rich LGBTQ+ community.
Washington Ethnic Studies Now WAESN is a multigenerational majority POC-led nonprofit advancing Ethnic Studies and racial justice in Washington. We center people of color build youth-centered leadership and learning and organize…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc and the most unlike its peers is United Territories of Pacific Islanders Washington-Utopia Wa. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
9 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. 9 of the 12 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 RVC SEATTLE ↗
- Who funds MULTI-COMMUNITIES ↗
- Who funds WHITE CENTER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds UNITED TERRITORIES OF PACIFIC ISLANDERS WASHINGTON-UTOPIA WA ↗
- Who funds The Pride Foundation ↗
- Who funds GAY CITY HEALTH PROJECT ↗
- Who funds MOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER ↗
- Who funds INTERFAITH WORKING GROUP ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) 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: Seattle Foundation · The Pride Foundation · Philanthropy Northwest · Artsfund · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Api Chaya 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 Api Chaya?
Find your warmest path to Api Chaya 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.