· Private foundation
Ash Grove Charitable 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 FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k79 grants · $275k
- $10k–50k27 grants · $444k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| USD 413 FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| SOUTHERN UTAH UNIVERSITY | $25,000 |
| THAYER ACRES AGRICULTURE CENTER INC | $25,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $25,000 |
| CITY OF LOUISVILLE | $25,000 |
| NEOSHO COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| BRANFORD HIGH SCHOOL | $25,000 |
| STARLIGHT THEATRE ASSOCIATION | $25,000 |
| FOREMAN SCHOOL DISTRICT | $24,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $20,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $20,000 |
| THE HEIGHTS ELLIS COUNTY FAMILY RESOURCES INC | $20,000 |
| CITY OF HUNTINGTON | $15,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $15,000 |
| HELENA FOOD SHARE INC | $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 (FY20–24, $421k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 65% 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 +20% since the first grant, against +11% for the ones you funded once.
76 repeat relationships — 27 still active in FY2024, 49 since wound down; 78 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, 17% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $587k 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
- HFHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF OMAHA INC5× · 2020–2024 · $55k · revenue +89%
- IAIMMERSE ARKANSAS2× · 2022–2024 · $30k · revenue +66%
WASHINGTON ALLIANCE FOR BETTER SCHOOLS4× · 2021–2024 · $30k · revenue +64%
Funded once
- RMRonald McDonald House Globalgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $30k · revenue +27%
- UWUNITED WE MARCH IN SUPPORT OF MONROE CITYone grant, 2021 · $25k
- TNTHE NEOSHO COUNTY FAIR ASSOCIATION INCone grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue -11%
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.
Wichita's littlest heroes (wlh) exists to provide hope, help, and happiness to families of children ages 0-18 in the kansas area who are battling life-threatening medical conditions. wlh strives to accomplish this be being a physical and…
Helping people move to a better life through hope-filled care, services, and advocacy; calling all those of goodwill to join us
The Welcome House is a non-profit, sober living, recovery program (incorporated in 1971) with the sole purpose of educating and rehabilitating the adult male alcoholic/ addict and the expressed mission of returning the individual to…
House of Hope Kansas City is unique, because we work with teens and their parents to find solutions and ultimately, restoration of healthy family relationships. We serve families in crisis with our program for residents to experience the…
Goodwill empowers people to reach their full potential through work opportunities, training, and support services.
Offer hope to build a better tomorrow through mental health services.
The kansas children's discovery center enhances the lives of children and enriches the communities it serves.
Shelterwell fosters a spirit of connected community, centered on the belief that housing is a human right.
To provide shelter and advocacy services to victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking in the 11 counties of southeast kansas.
Ronald McDonald House Charities of Tulsa provides essential services that remove barriers, strengthen families, and promote healing when children need healthcare.
Grow food, farms and community in support of a sustainable, healthy and local food system.
All of Cornerstone efforts are directed toward interrupting the cycle of homelessness, providing decent, safe, accessible and affordable housing of choice to moderate and low-income households, and revitalizing Topeka neighborhoods.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Restoreokc Inc and the most unlike its peers is Baker Soccer United. 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 29 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) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.7% 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.
289 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. 289 of the 400 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 Greater Kansas City Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds UNITED WE ↗
- Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF OMAHA INC ↗
- Who funds IMMERSE ARKANSAS ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON ALLIANCE FOR BETTER SCHOOLS ↗
- Who funds Ronald McDonald House Global ↗
- Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
- Who funds HEART OF AMERICA COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ZOO INC OF KANSAS CITY MISSOURI C/O LINDA FALK ↗
- Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds MY FATHERS HOUSE ↗
- Who funds THE NEOSHO COUNTY FAIR ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds Boise State University Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds SNOHOMISH COUNTY COUNCIL OF THE SOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PAUL ↗
- Who funds BAKER CITY LIONS CLUB CHARITABLE FU ↗
- Who funds HEART TO HEART INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds NEOSHO COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE HOPE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF SANTAQUIN ↗
- Who funds CITY RESCUE MISSION INC ↗
- Who funds MANNA HOUSE ↗
- Who funds USD 413 Foundation ↗
- Who funds Texas Conservation Alliance ↗
- Who funds STARLIGHT THEATRE ASSOCIATION OF KANSAS CITY INC ↗
- Who funds TREASURE VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
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: The Sunderland Foundation · The H & R Block Foundation · Oppenstein Brothers Foundation · United Way of Greater Kansas City Inc · R a Long Foundation 600 Plaza West Bldg · The Sherman Family Foundation · Health Forward Foundation · Greater Kansas City Community Foundation · Marion and Henry Bloch Family Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Kansas City · The Kansas City Royals Foundation · Ewing Marion Kauffman 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 Ash Grove Charitable 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.
- Pearl Buck Center Incorporated — 76% of income from government
- Oregon Trail Preservation Trust Inc — 66% of income from government
- Portland YouthBuilders — 35% of income from government
- Clackamas Women's Services — 33% of income from government
- Bradley Angle — 10% of income from government
- Arcadia-Desoto County Habitat for Humanity Incorporated — 5% of income from government
- Willamette Family Inc — 4% of income from government
- Girls Inc of the Pacific Northwest — 4% of income from government
- Crossroads Creative & Performing Arts Center Inc — 1% of income from government
- K9S for Warriors 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 Ash Grove Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Ash Grove Charitable 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.