Loading…
· Public charity
ARIZONA STRUT
To support applied learning in our educational system through scholarships and donated electronics technology and to provide refurbished equipment to education and community non-profit organizations.
$665k
Granted FY2024
2
Grants
1
Communities
$21k
Largest
01What you fund
01beneath 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
2018
scholarcharterdistrict
2019
levelsuccesscharterdistrict
2020
valleystudentselfsuccessunified district
2021
—
2022
techrealize dreamsadultsempoweraccessyouthrefugees
2023
focuscompassionateaccessyouthrefugeeslives
2024
financialaccesschristianexperiencestudentslives
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
02FY2024 · 2 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $2k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $21k
$21,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$606k
Total assets
Largest grants
- Others (63) under reporting threshold$21,000
- Regenerating Sonora$1,500
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 (FY24–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11% — the area typically sits at 11%. 100% of your dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-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 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
Prescott Valley Charter School
To provide a safe, positive environment for all students with a strong focus on academic success, student leadership, parental involvement, and community partnership.
Education
2
Edupreneurship Inc
The school is dedicated to providing all children, focusing on educationally and economically at-risk students, with an alternative well-rounded educational setting that will enable them to become lifelong learners and successful citizens.
—
3
Ball Charter Schools (Val Vista)
Arizona ball charter schools provides a personalized education to all students emphasizing comprehensive academic excellence in a safe, nurturing environment through partnering parents, students and staff.
Education
4
Skyview School Inc
To enrich the lives of students and ensure that future generations are well prepared to live their lives with meaning, dignity, and the ability to work together for a better world. the schools serves students in kindergarten through eighth…
Education
5
Plc Charter Schools
To develop a Student-Family-Teacher-Civic relationship that develops and sustains a Professional Learning Community where arts and technology combine with academics and real life skills.
Education
6
Arizona Community Development Corporatio
The School is committed to providing the highest quality education where children can achieve their full academic potential. This is accomplished by individualized instruction in core curriculum, low teacher-student ratios and a qualified…
Education
7
Edge School Inc
Edge provides an alternative to traditional education, creating an inclusive school community, focused on student learning.
Education
8
Vista Charter Public Schools Inc
At vista, students master core subjects through the power of applying knowledge in a real-world context. in addition to rigorous academics, our schools focus on increased proficiency in crucial areas such as critical thinking, problem…
Education
9
Leading Edge Academy Queen Creek
Educational services to students in queen creek, az and surrounding communities.
Education
10
Desert Heights Charter Schools
In collaboration with our community and stakeholders, the School will provide a rigorous, standards based academic environment through a balance of intensive, compassionate teaching.
Education
11
Ecs Corona-Norco
Operation of a k-12 public charter school, excelsior charter school corona-norco.
Education
12
Arizona Latino Leaders in Education
We exist to ensure that individuals from the communities most impacted by education inequities are the ones making decisions for all students
Education
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Career Success Schools Inc and the most unlike its peers is Eduprise School Parent Teacher. 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
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 20 years old; the field is 11. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 30% startups (under 5 years old) — 13% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
Closures · last 5 years
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
orgs you fund
2%1/48
the rest of the field
14%
2,744/19,077
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.
04the grantee network
28 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2023–2024.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
11
Early backer (in before they grew)
26/28
Grantees still filing
24/28
Grew since you first funded
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.
Arizona Community FoundationAZ22.4× affinity11 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Arizona Community Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 organisation ARIZONA STRUT 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
’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
typical government reliance, FY23–24
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.
04Through 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: Regenerating Sonora.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
insufficient risk
Limited financial data in public filings.
Track record & reputation
medium risk
2 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 843274211 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 Regenerating Sonora, 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 2024; revenue held over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 1% of their budget — diversified.
- 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 Arizona Strut?
Find your warmest path to Arizona Strut 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
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines