· Public charity
Campaigning for Charities
To support and promote philanthropy through a program that is employee- focused, cost efficient and effective in providing all federal employees the opportunity to improve the quality of life for all.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2018.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2018
- Under $10k13 grants · $100k
- $10k–50k20 grants · $429k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $323k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MISC OTHER CHARITIES 5000 | $237,203 |
| COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARITIES | $85,594 |
| UNITED WAY OF EL PASO COUNTY | $48,994 |
| ANIMAL CHARITIES OF AMERICA | $38,391 |
| COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARITIES OF CALIF | $37,916 |
| ROADRUNNER FOOD BANK INC | $32,046 |
| MILITARY FAMILY & VETERANS SERVICE | $31,782 |
| CHRISTIAN CHILDREN'S CHARITIES | $28,957 |
| HEALTH & MEDICAL RESEARCH CHARITIES | $24,070 |
| GLOBAL IMPACT | $20,904 |
| CATHOLIC SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS OF | $16,914 |
| AMERICA'S CHARITIES | $16,573 |
| ANIMAL WELFARE FUND | $16,435 |
| ANIMAL HUMANE ASSOCIATION OF NEW | $15,231 |
| CANCERCURE OF AMERICA CARE | $14,829 |
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 (FY17–18, $104k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% 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.
30 repeat relationships — 30 still active in FY2018, 0 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2018 (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 FY2018, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $248k 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
- UWUNITED WAY OF EL PASO COUNTY2× · 2017–2018 · $140k · revenue +24%
- RFROADRUNNER FOOD BANK INC2× · 2017–2018 · $108k · revenue +52%
WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC2× · 2017–2018 · $69k · revenue +70%
Funded once
- CSCHRISTIAN SERVICE CHARITIES INCone grant, 2017 · $66k
- LILOCAL INDEPENDENT CHARITIES OF TEXASone grant, 2017 · $21k · revenue -76%
- AMAMERICAS MOST COST EFFECTIVE CHARITIESone grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue -55%
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.
To support, and be organized and operate to promote and support the activities and purposes of other 501(c)(3)organizations that assist children, families, adults & communities by providing services that further their exempt purposes.
Americas best charities raises funds and awareness to improve life both locally and globally by aiding our diverse partner charities and encouraging supporters to contribute to their cause.
Financially support charitable organizations through motor vehicle & other property donations.
To encourage more giving. more people, giving more, more often, to more charitable organizations.
We envision a world where every person in every community has an opportunity to live their healthiest life.
At donor advised charitable giving, inc., our mission is to increase charitable giving in the united states by offering advantageous ways to give useful information and unbiased guidance.
Sports charities usa receives funds from workplace payroll deduction fund drives for distribution to member agencies.
Local animal charities of america raises funds and awareness to improve the lives of animals by aiding our partner charities and encouraging supporters to contribute to their cause.
Americas best local charities raises funds and awareness to assist neighbors in need by aiding our diverse partner charities and encouraging supporters to contribute to their cause.
Moral compass federation facilitates collaboration among multiple veteran-led nonprofit organizations, individuals, and businesses who came together during the fall of kabul, afghanistan to evacuate and resettle afghan allies who were in…
Our mission is to connect caring people with great causes worldwide.
To improve lives by mobilizing caring power of communities around the world to advance common good.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Women Children and Family Service Charities of America and the most unlike its peers is Roger L Von Amelunxen Foundation Inc. 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 39 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.
48 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. 48 of the 54 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 CHC CREATING HEALTHIER COMMUNITIES ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF EL PASO COUNTY ↗
- Who funds MILITARY FAMILY AND VETERANS SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL CHARITIES OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds ROADRUNNER FOOD BANK INC ↗
- Who funds Global Impact ↗
- Who funds WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds HEALTH & MEDICAL RESEARCH CHARITIES OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds CHRISTIAN SERVICE CHARITIES INC ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL WELFARE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL HUMANE ASSOCIATION OF NEW MEXICO INC ↗
- Who funds CATHOLIC SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds AMERICA'S CHARITIES ↗
- Who funds CANCERCURE OF AMERICA- CARE UNDERSTAND RESEARCH & END ↗
- Who funds BORDER PATROL MUSEUM AND MEMORIAL LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds EARTHSHARE ↗
- Who funds CHILDRENS CHARITIES OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds CHRISTIAN CHILDRENS CHARITIES ↗
- Who funds MILITARY SUPPORT GROUPS OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds CHRISTIAN CHARITIES USA ↗
- Who funds CHILDRENS MED RES CHARITIES OF AMER DBA CHILDRENS MED & RES CHAR OF AMER ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN FIRST - AMERICA'S CHARITIES ↗
- Who funds MEDICAL RESEARCH CHARITIES INC ↗
- Who funds HUMAN CARE CHARITIES OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds Public Lands Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds LOCAL INDEPENDENT CHARITIES OF TEXAS ↗
- Who funds AMERICAS MOST COST EFFECTIVE CHARITIES ↗
- Who funds PAWS AND STRIPES INC ↗
- Who funds STOREHOUSE NEW MEXICO ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY SHARES OF COLORADO INC ↗
- Who funds HEALTH FIRST - AMERICA'S CHARITIES ↗
- Who funds RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE NEW MEXICO ↗
- Who funds WOMEN CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICE CHARITIES OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds PB&J FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS INC ↗
- Who funds MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF NEW MEXICO ↗
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: Give Back Foundation · The United Way of Central Maryland Inc · Federal Employees Support for Cfc Charitable Giving Incorporated · United Way of South Hampton Roads · United Way of Greater Philadelphia and Southern New Jersey · Global Impact · United Way of Greater Kansas City Inc · The United Way of the Greater Dayton Area · United Way of Tucson and Southern Arizona Inc · United Way of Kitsap County · Rappahannock United Way Inc · United Way of Central Ohio 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 Campaigning for Charities 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.
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 0% of income from government
- Food for the Poor Inc — 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 Campaigning for Charities?
Find your warmest path to Campaigning for Charities 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.