· Private foundation
B & W Family Foundation
Its FY2025 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 FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k30 grants · $121k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CHESTER COUNTY FOOD BANK | $20,000 |
| SEA SHEPHERD CONSERVATION SOCIETY | $7,860 |
| CLEAN OCEAN ACTION | $7,860 |
| AMAZON CONSERVATION TEAM - US | $7,860 |
| CORAL REEF ALLIANCE | $7,860 |
| WEST CHESTER FOOD CUPBOARD | $7,860 |
| CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS | $7,860 |
| PLASTIC OCEAN PROJECT | $7,860 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $5,240 |
| PROJECT SANCTUARY | $5,240 |
| LIFE FOR RELIEF AND DEVELOPMENT | $5,240 |
| OCEAN FOUNDATION | $5,240 |
| LIVING BEYOND BREAST CANCER | $5,240 |
| CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA FOOD BANK | $5,240 |
| FAMILY PROMISE OF SOUTHERN CHESTER | $3,668 |
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 (FY21–25, $33k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 45% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
37 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2025, 19 since wound down; 13 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $63k 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
DIRECT RELIEF3× · 2020–2023 · $25k · revenue +20%- CPCENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA FOOD BANK6× · 2020–2025 · $24k · revenue +20%
- TCTHE CORAL REEF ALLIANCE4× · 2022–2025 · $21k · revenue +39%
Funded once
- IRINTERNATIONAL RELIEF TEAMSone grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue -7%
GLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2020 · $8k · revenue -17%- TWTHE WETLANDS INITIATIVEone grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +18%
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.
Water.org's goal is to bring safe water and sanitation to the world through access to small, affordable loans.
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.
To develop and promote a carbon dividends framework - based on carbon fees whose revenues are rebated to citizens through dividends - as the most cost-effective, equitable, and politically viable climate solution.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Action Against Hunger - Usa and the most unlike its peers is Veterans Foundation of America. 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 32 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
115 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. 115 of the 132 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 DIRECT RELIEF ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds THE CORAL REEF ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds CHESTER COUNTY FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR DISASTER PHILANTHROPY INC ↗
- Who funds WEST CHESTER FOOD CUPBOARD ↗
- Who funds Amazon Watch Inc ↗
- Who funds Willistown Conservation Trust Inc ↗
- Who funds SEA SHEPHERD CONSERVATION SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Eckerd College ↗
- Who funds MAP International Inc ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL RELIEF TEAMS ↗
- Who funds CLEAN OCEAN ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds Woodwell Climate Research Center Inc ↗
- Who funds BRANDYWINE VALLEY SPCA ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds THE ALLIANCE FOR CLIMATE PROTECTION ↗
- Who funds OneReef Worldwide Stewardship ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds The Ocean Foundation ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL CRISIS AID INC ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds PENNSYLVANIA HOME OF THE SPARROW ↗
- Who funds The Plastic Ocean Project Inc ↗
- Who funds AMAZON CONSERVATION TEAM ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds GLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MOTHERS' HOME ↗
- Who funds Operation Warm Inc ↗
- Who funds A Sanctuary for Military Families Inc DBA Project Sanctuary ↗
- Who funds LIVING BEYOND BREAST CANCER ↗
- Who funds LIFE FOR RELIEF AND DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
- Who funds THE WETLANDS INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds Veterans Foundation of America ↗
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 Philadelphia Foundation · The Gordon Charter Foundation · W W Smith Charitable Trust · The Becket Family Foundation · Connelly Foundation · The Cigna Group Foundation · United Way of Greater Philadelphia and Southern New Jersey · The William Penn Foundation · Phillies Charities Inc · Chester County Community Foundation · Claneil Foundation Inc · Give Lively Foundation Inc
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 B & W Family 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.
- Veterans Foundation of America — 100% of income from government
- The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc — 16% of income from government
- Woodwell Climate Research Center Inc — 11% of income from government
- Family Promise Inc — 2% of income from government
- Sacred Heart University Incorporated — 1% of income from government
- Sandy Hook Promise Foundation — 0% of income from government
- Eckerd College — 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 B & W Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to B & W Family 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.