· Public charity
Baby2Baby
Baby2Baby provides children in need across the country with diapers, formula, clothing and all the basic necessities that every child deserves.
Read this first · the figures below need context
100% of Baby2Baby’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Entertainment Industry Foundation, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2019, the last year Baby2Baby named its own grantees at scale: 15 organizations, $113k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 15 grants below total $112,500 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $24,873,948 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $24,761,448 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.
By grant size · FY2019
- Under $10k10 grants · $48k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $65k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Miami Diaper Bank | $20,000 |
| Mother to Mother | $15,000 |
| Eastside Baby Corner | $10,000 |
| Little Essentials | $10,000 |
| Share Our Spare | $10,000 |
| Weecycle | $5,000 |
| Room to Grow | $5,000 |
| Hawaii Diaper Bank | $5,000 |
| Bundles of Joy | $5,000 |
| Babies Need Bottoms | $5,000 |
| Moms Helping Mom | $5,000 |
| Texas Diaper Bank | $5,000 |
| PDX Diaper Bank | $5,000 |
| Hope Supply Co | $5,000 |
| Diaper Bank of Minnesota | $2,500 |
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 (FY17–19, $301k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 70% 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 +223% since the first grant, against +85% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2019, 4 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call). Read against FY2019, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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 FY2019, 49% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $58k 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
- HMHELPING MAMAS INC5× · 2017–2024 · $45k · revenue +662%
- LELITTLE ESSENTIALS6× · 2017–2024 · $45k · revenue +181%
- HSHOPE SUPPLY CO6× · 2017–2024 · $43k · revenue +45%
Funded once
- BIBabycycle Incgraduated4× · 2017–2024 · $15k · revenue +242%
- MTMOTHER TO MOTHER INCone grant, 2018 · $10k
THE COLORADO NONPROFIT DEVELOPMENT CENTERgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +29%
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.
By advocating for quality early care and education, empowering families with information and financial support, and building the capabilities of educators, Children's Council of San Francisco ensures that every child in San Francisco has…
We make it possible for people in marin to achieve well-being by providing the vital services they need. together, we break down the barriers that get in the way of fair and lasting change in service to better outcomes for all.
Family health care centers of greater los angeles aims to enchance the quality of life for men, women, and children in the greater los angeles through the provision of high quality, accessible and affordable health care services.
Work together to improve the lives of children, youth, and families in our communities.the childrens alliance is an inter-agency collaborative, which coordinates needed family support services,convenes child and family advocates to solve…
Our mission is to improve the health of our patients and the community and advocate the feminist goals of social, political, & economic equality.
To serve, advocate, and collaborate for those in need by developing innovative strategies for self-empowerment.
To improve the quality of life for the diverse communities we serve providing affordable and comprehensive healthcare and education in a welcoming multi-cultural environment.
The mission of the child abuse prevention council of sacramento (capc) is to reduce child abuse and neglect.
The mission of laguna beach community clinic (lbcc) is to provide excellent medical care regardless of the patient's ability to pay.
The roots of the los angeles didi hirsch psychiatric service dba didi hirsch mental health services ("dhmhs") extend back to the 1930s, when a group of women funded psychiatric care for people whose lives were devastated by the depression.…
To improve our communities' sexual and reproductive health outcomes through health care, education, and advocacy.
Eisner health is a quality-focused, federally qualified nonprofit community health center dedicated to improving the physical, social, and emotional well-being of people in the communities we serve, regardless of income.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Antelope Valley Partners for Health and the most unlike its peers is Weingart Foundation. 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 28 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) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% 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.
582 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.
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 ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HELPING MAMAS INC ↗
- Who funds LITTLE ESSENTIALS ↗
- Who funds HOPE SUPPLY CO ↗
- Who funds Share our Spare ↗
- Who funds MIAMI DIAPER BANK INC ↗
- Who funds MOMS HELPING MOMS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SHAREBABY INC ↗
- Who funds ROOM TO GROW NATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds Babycycle Inc ↗
- Who funds MOTHER TO MOTHER INC ↗
- Who funds BABY'S BOUNTY ↗
- Who funds THE FOSTER ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds THE COLORADO NONPROFIT DEVELOPMENT CENTER ↗
- Who funds KIDVANTAGE ↗
- Who funds WEECYCLE ↗
- Who funds HAWAII CHILDREN'S ACTION NETWORK ↗
- Who funds PDX DIAPER BANK ↗
- Who funds TEXAS DIAPER BANK ↗
- Who funds Babies Need Bottoms Inc ↗
- Who funds BUNDLES OF JOY NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds DIAPER BANK OF MINNESOTA ↗
- Who funds PROJECT MKC ↗
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 Ralph M Parsons Foundation · Shelter Partnership Inc · United Way Inc · National Diaper Bank Network Inc · The Rose Hills Foundation · The Ahmanson Foundation · Unihealth Foundation · Weingart Foundation · Los Angeles Regional Food Bank · Food Forward Inc · Cedars-Sinai Medical Center · QueensCare
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 Baby2Baby 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.
- Pdx Diaper Bank — 2% 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 Baby2Baby?
Find your warmest path to Baby2Baby 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.