· Private foundation
Bibi Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
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.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k9 grants · $24k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $100k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $299k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NSAF TRUST | $161,500 |
| ISLAMIC RELIEF USA | $76,200 |
| OLIVE COMMUNITY SERVICES | $61,124 |
| SAADAT FOUNDATION | $27,683 |
| UPLIFT CHARITY | $15,000 |
| ISOC-ORANGE CRESCENT SCHOOL | $15,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $12,800 |
| ZAKAT FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| FULLERTON MUSLIM COMMUNITY CENTER | $10,000 |
| MUSLIM LEGAL FUND OF AMERICA | $10,000 |
| JUSTICE FOR ALL | $5,000 |
| MASJID AL-SHAREEF | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| ZAYTUNA COLLEGE | $4,500 |
| UMMA COMMUNITY CLINIC | $1,000 |
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 US giving — 86% of grant dollars ($1.4M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 14% that went abroad ($234k) is mapped below.
Your human-services grants (FY18–24, $130k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 5% 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.
Beyond the US — 14% of all-years giving ($234k)
3 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
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 +25% since the first grant, against -39% for the ones you funded once.
27 repeat relationships — 14 still active in FY2024, 13 since wound down; 4 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, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $49k 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
- OCOLIVE COMMUNITY SERVICES INC7× · 2018–2024 · $302k · revenue +643% · 38% of their budget
- IRISLAMIC RELIEF USA4× · 2018–2024 · $216k · revenue +38%
- UCUPLIFT CHARITY CORPORATION7× · 2018–2024 · $91k · revenue +102%
Funded once
- OFOLIVECS FOUNDATIONone grant, 2020 · $75k · revenue -62% · 100% of their budget
- AFAL-RAHMAN FOUNDATION WAQFgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +77%
- HIHOME INSTEAD CHARITIESone grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue -39%
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.
Mumanitarian support poor muslim families
Zakat, aid and charity assisting humanity (zacah) is a minnesota-based grassroots organization dedicated to the collection and re-distribution of wealth, including zakat (mandatory charitable tax for all muslims) and sadaqah (any…
Muslimahs united was founded on islamic principles of justice, integrity, and commitment to community services. we aim to offer support, grounded in islamic practice of justice for muslim women of color, and all women who are affected by…
The organization was formed to provide the highest quality of religious, educational,and social services to the community in accordance with the teachings of the holyquran and traditions of prophet muhammad
Provide help to people who are victims of natural disasters or conflicts or suffering from poverty, hunger, disease, illiteracy, discrimination, homelessness, debt, unemployment, injustice, or lack of skills or economic opportunity.
Free medical services for the poor needy and elderly.
Community Services, Prayer arrangemrnts, Teachings of Islam and distribution of zakat funds inbetween poor communities.
Carry out charitable initiatives that provide essential support and basic necessities to those in need.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Zakat Foundation of America and the most unlike its peers is Al- Ansar Academy. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 18 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 15% 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.
19 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. 19 of the 52 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 OLIVE COMMUNITY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds ISLAMIC RELIEF USA ↗
- Who funds UPLIFT CHARITY CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds OLIVECS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MUSLIM LEGAL FUND OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds AL-RAHMAN FOUNDATION WAQF ↗
- Who funds THE ZAKAT FOUNDATION OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds SAADAT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Zaytuna College Inc ↗
- Who funds HOME INSTEAD CHARITIES ↗
- Who funds JUSTICE FOR ALL ↗
- Who funds FAMILY MANAGEMENT MATTERS ↗
- Who funds ACCESS CALIFORNIA SERVICES ↗
- Who funds NISWA ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds AL- ANSAR ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY MUSLIM MEDICAL ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds VIETNAM MUSLIM 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: M Zamin & Reshma Farukhi Family Foundation · Islamic Relief USA · The Zakat Foundation of America · American Muslim Community Foundation · Mohammady Foundation · Orange County Islamic Foundation · The Tabbaa Foundation · The California Wellness Foundation · Sempra Foundation · Verizon Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Network for Good
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 Bibi 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.
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 Bibi Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Bibi 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.