Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Boys & Girls Clubs of Georgia Inc

To promote exclusively the social welfare of boys and girls in georgia; to provide guidance and to promote the health, social, educational, vocational, character, and cultural development of boys(continued on schedule o) and girls in georgia without regard to race, color, creed, or national origin; and to receive, invest, and disburse…

$101k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$23k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20192024.

Youth Development$548kHuman Services$39kRecreation & Sports$22kArts & Culture$9k
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 7 grants below total $88,251 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $100,736 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $12,485 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k4 grants · $27k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $61k
$7,604
Median grant
1
States reached
$566k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BGC OF CENTRAL GA$23,426
BGC OF VALDOSTA$22,007
BGC OF METRO ATLANTA$15,818
BGC OF GREATER AUGUSTA$7,604
BGC OF LANIER$6,961
BGC OF ALBANY$6,435
BGC OF SOUTHEAST GEORGIA$6,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 65% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%BGC OF BARTOW: $32k → 10%BGC OF NORTH CENTRAL GA: $10k → 11%BGC OF METRO ATLANTA: $29k → 14%BGC OF SOUTHEAST GEORGIA: $6k → 14%BGC OF NORTH GA ROME: $20k → 15%BGC OF VALDOSTA: $22k → 15%BGC OF GREATER AUGUSTA (CSRA): $9k → 18%BGC OF LAURENS & JOHNSON: $22k → 21%BGC OF CENTRAL GA: $40k → 23%BGC OF BARTOW: $17k → 10%BGC OF METRO ATLANTA: $29k → 14%BGC OF VALDOSTA: $20k → 15%BGC OF GREATER AUGUSTA: $8k → 18%BGC OF LAURENS & JOHNSON: $17k → 21%BGC OF CENTRAL GA: $34k → 23%BGC OF BARTOW: $7k → 10%BGC OF METRO ATLANTA: $16k → 14%BGC VALDOSTA: $12k → 15%BGC OF GREATER AUGUSTA (CSRA): $7k → 18%B&GC OF LAURENS & JOHNSON COUNTIES: $9k → 21%BGC OF CENTRAL GA: $26k → 23%BGC OF METRO ATLANTA: $10k → 14%BGC VALDOSTA: $9k → 15%BGC OF GREATER AUGUSTA (CSRA): $6k → 18%BGC OF CENTRAL GA: $23k → 23%BGC OF VALDOSTA: $7k → 15%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$601k · 11 repeat orgs$16k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +26% since the first grant, against -27% for the ones you funded once.

11 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
1

Total granted

$601k
$10k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+26%
-27%

Still filing today

82%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

  • BG
    BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF CENTRAL GEORGIA INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $123k · revenue +103%
  • BG
    BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF VALDOSTA INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $70k · revenue +81%
  • BA
    BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF LANIER INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $68k · revenue +18%

Funded once

  • BG
    BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF NORTH CENTRAL GEORGIA
    one grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue -27%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Boys and Girls Club of Augusta/Waynesboro

To enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring and responsible citizens.

Youth Development
2
Boys Girls Club
3
Boys & Girls Clubs of the San Gorgonio Pass

To inspire and enable all young people especially those in need to realize their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens.

Education
4
Boys & Girls Club of Baldwin and Jones Co Inc

To enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, responsible citizens.

5
Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Alabama Inc

To enable and motivate all youth within a safe environment to reach their full potential as productive, caring, and responsible citizens according to judeo-christian principles.

Youth Development
6
Boys & Girls Clubs of Southwest Virginia Inc

To enable and inspire all young people, ages five to eighteen, especially those who need us most, to realize their full potential as productive, responsible, and caring citizens.

Youth Development
7
Boys and Girls Clubs of the Capital Area

To provide a safe, fun place where youth are inspired to make healthy, responsible choices.

Youth Development
8
Boys and Girls Club of Glacier Country

To enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, responsible citizens.

Youth Development
9
The Boys & Girls Clubs Inc

To inspire and enable all young people, especially those most in need of our services, to realize and develop their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens in a global society.

10
Boys & Girls Club of Georgetown

None

Youth Development
11
Boys and Girls Club of Bartlesville

To enable our young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their potential.

Youth Development
12
Boys & Girls Clubs of the Northwoods Inc

To empower all youth, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, and responsible citizens.

Youth Development

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Boys & Girls Clubs of Gordon Murray and Whitfield Counties Inc and the most unlike its peers is Boys & Girls Club of Bartow County Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

04the grantee network

12 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 12 of the 13 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/12
Grantees still filing
6/12
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Boys & Girls Clubs of Metro Atlanta Inc — $82,767 · Youth DevelopmentBoys & Girls Clubs of Metro Atlanta IncBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF VALDOSTA INC — $70,299 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF VALDOSTA INCBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF LANIER INC — $67,790 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF LANIER INCBoys & Girls Club of Bartow County Inc — $56,109 · Youth DevelopmentBoys & Girls Club of Bartow County IncBoys & Girls Clubs of North Georgia Inc — $42,053 · Youth DevelopmentBoys & Girls Clubs of North Georgia IncBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF MOULTRIECOLQUITT COUNTY INC — $37,893 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF MOULTRIECOLQUITT COUNTY INCBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GORDON MURRAY AND WHITFIELD COUNTIES INC — $31,985 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GORDON MURRAY AND WHITFIELD COUNTIES INC+3 more — $28,164 · Youth Development+3 moreBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF CENTRAL GEORGIA INC — $123,496 · OtherBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF CENTRAL GEORGI…B&GC of LaurenJohnson — $47,081 · OtherB&GC of LaurenJohnsonBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER AUGUSTA INC — $29,311 · OtherBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER AUGUST…
Youth Development$417,060Other$199,888

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF CENTRAL GEORGIA INC — $123,496 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetBoys & Girls Clubs of Metro Atlanta Inc — $82,767 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF VALDOSTA INC — $70,299 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF LANIER INC — $67,790 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetBoys & Girls Clubs of North Georgia Inc — $42,053 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF MOULTRIECOLQUITT COUNTY INC — $37,893 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GORDON MURRAY AND WHITFIELD COUNTIES INC — $31,985 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER AUGUSTA INC — $29,311 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF ALBANY INC — $11,778 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF NORTH CENTRAL GEORGIA — $10,386 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SOUTHEAST GEORGIA INC — $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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.

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.

Boys & Girls Clubs of America (Group Return)GA26× affinity10 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Boys & Girls Clubs of America (Group Return) · Boys & Girls Clubs of America · Georgia Power Foundation Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · Good360 · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Boys & Girls Clubs of Georgia Inc 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.

2024
2021222324
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    typical government reliance, FY2024

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 13 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph