Loading…
Loading…
· Public charity
Fundraising & grant making in support of the not-for-profit mission of bon secours richmond health system.
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2019
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY19–19, $24k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9% — the area typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. 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 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.
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 17% of Bon Secours Richmond Healthcare Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 100% of the giving stays in VA; read by stated purpose it is 83% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
Patient care, teaching and medical research
Uvimco is organized to invest funds on behalf of the rector and visitors of the university of virginia (the university or uva) and university-associated organizations(uaos).
To support the educational,scientific & charitable activities of vcu.
Fundraising and grant making organization.
The virginia museum of fine arts foundation (foundation) was founded in 1976 to support the virginia museum of fine arts (museum), an agency of the commonwealth of virginia. to accomplish its mission, the foundation administers a…
To provide excellence in the delivery of healthcare.
The university of virginia health foundation seeks to benefit and support the study and teaching of medicine and nursing at the university of virginia. the foundation further seeks to support the university of virginia health system by…
To create and sustain a dynamic and innovative physician community for the benefit of the greater richmond area.
Ivna health services provides services to underinsured and uninsured persons throughout the greater richmond area.
Promote the study and teaching of architecture at the university of virginia through direct financial assistance and through student and alumni support.
To provide excellence in the delivery of healthcare.
University of virginia medical school foundation encourages and fosters the involvement of medical alumni in the life of their alma mater as ambassadors, advocates, advisors, benefactors and educational partners. the constituents of the…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Virginia Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Patricia Sullivan Haitian Outreach Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
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
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.
Open a dossier: Bon Secours Mercy Health Foundation · The Community Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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.
Every dot is one organisation Bon Secours Richmond Healthcare 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. 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.
Through Plinth
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: RVA RAPID TRANSIT INC.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
~5 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 7 filed years.
7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
US 501(c)(3); EIN 814216743 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on RVA RAPID TRANSIT INC, 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
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.
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
Find your warmest path to Bon Secours Richmond Healthcare Foundation 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.