Skip to content
Campaigning for Charities at a glance

· 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.

$851k
Granted FY2018
35
Grants FY2018
11
States reached
$237k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2018.

Employment$775kPhilanthropy$475kAnimals$234kHuman Services$219kHealth$158kFood & Nutrition$133kInternational$72kEnvironment$62kOther$0
02FY2018 · 35 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2018

  • Under $10k13 grants · $100k
  • $10k–50k20 grants · $429k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $323k
$13,445
Median grant
11
States reached
$2.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its 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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%WOUNDED WARRIORS FAMILY SUPPORT: $7k → 12%ROGER L VON AMELUNXEN FOUNDATION: $7k → 13%WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT: $55k → 14%WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT: $14k → 14%AMERICAN RED CROSS IN NEW MEXICO: $6k → 14%NEW MEXICO VETERANS INTEGRATION: $7k → 14%CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $8k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
NY
MA
RI
CA
CO
NE
VA
MD
NM
DC
GA
TX
FL
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

77%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 30 repeat orgs$502k to everyone else

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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

30
20

Total granted

$1.7M
$253k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-49%
-47%

Still filing today

70%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2018, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $248k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18
PhilanthropyHuman ServicesAnimalsFood & NutritionHealthArts & CultureOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF EL PASO COUNTY
    2× · 2017–2018 · $140k · revenue +8%
  • RF
    ROADRUNNER FOOD BANK INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $108k · revenue +52%
  • WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $69k · revenue +90%

Funded once

  • CS
    CHRISTIAN SERVICE CHARITIES INC
    one grant, 2017 · $66k
  • LI
    LOCAL INDEPENDENT CHARITIES OF TEXAS
    one grant, 2017 · $21k · revenue -76%
  • AM
    AMERICAS MOST COST EFFECTIVE CHARITIES
    one grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue -55%
How this is measured

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

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Community First - America's Charities

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.

Philanthropy
2
Americas Best Charities

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.

Philanthropy
3
Car Donation Foundation

Financially support charitable organizations through motor vehicle & other property donations.

Philanthropy
4
Give Back Foundation

To encourage more giving. more people, giving more, more often, to more charitable organizations.

Philanthropy
5
Chc Creating Healthier Communities Local

We envision a world where every person in every community has an opportunity to live their healthiest life.

—
6
Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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.

Philanthropy
7
Sports Charities Usa - Supporting Youth Disabled and National Team Athletics

Sports charities usa receives funds from workplace payroll deduction fund drives for distribution to member agencies.

—
8
Local Animal Charities of America

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.

Recreation & Sports
9
Americas Best Local Charities

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.

Philanthropy
10
Moral Compass Federation Inc

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…

Public Benefit
11
The American Fund for Charities

Our mission is to connect caring people with great causes worldwide.

—
12
United Way Worldwide

To improve lives by mobilizing caring power of communities around the world to advance common good.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Women Children and Family Service Charities of America; 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.
04the grantee network

48 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2026, 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
33/48
Grantees still filing
20/48
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHC CREATING HEALTHIER COMMUNITIES: $345,998 · OtherCHC CREATING HEALTHIER COMMUNITIESMISC OTHER CHARITIES 5000: $237,203 · OtherMISC OTHER CHARITIES 5000MILITARY FAMILY AND VETERANS SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS OF AMERICA: $118,748 · OtherMILITARY FAMILY AND VETERANS SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS OF AMERICACHRISTIAN SERVICE CHARITIES INC: $65,892 · OtherCATHOLIC SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS OF AMERICA: $45,448 · Other+27 more: $510,316 · Other+27 moreUNITED WAY OF EL PASO COUNTY: $140,102 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY OF E…HEALTH & MEDICAL RESEARCH CHARITIES OF AMERICA: $67,245 · PhilanthropyHEALTH & MEDICA…MILITARY SUPPORT GROUPS OF AMERICA: $34,830 · PhilanthropyMILITARY SUPPOR…CHRISTIAN CHARITIES USA: $33,832 · PhilanthropyCHRISTIAN CHARI…LOCAL INDEPENDENT CHARITIES OF TEXAS: $21,446 · PhilanthropyLOCAL INDEPENDE…COMMUNITY SHARES OF COLORADO INC: $17,653 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY SHARE…ANIMAL CHARITIES OF AMERICA: $107,736 · AnimalsANIMAL CHAR…ANIMAL WELFARE FUND INC: $52,197 · AnimalsANIMAL WELF…ANIMAL HUMANE ASSOCIATION OF NEW MEXICO INC: $45,511 · AnimalsANIMAL HUMA…PAWS AND STRIPES INC: $18,969 · AnimalsPAWS AND ST…WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $68,657 · Human ServicesAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $37,591 · Human ServicesCATHOLIC CHARITIES: $8,348 · Human ServicesROGER L VON AMELUNXEN FOUNDATION INC: $7,093 · Human ServicesNEW MEXICO VETERANS INTEGRATION CENTERS: $7,037 · Human ServicesWOUNDED WARRIORS FAMILY SUPPORT INC: $6,912 · Human ServicesROADRUNNER FOOD BANK INC: $107,668 · Food & NutritionSTOREHOUSE NEW MEXICO: $18,619 · Food & NutritionGlobal Impact: $72,328 · InternationalFOOD FOR THE POOR INC: $6,488 · InternationalEARTHSHARE: $37,789 · EnvironmentPublic Lands Foundation Inc: $23,776 · Environment
Other$1,323,605Philanthropy$315,108Animals$224,413Human Services$135,638Food & Nutrition$126,287International$78,816Environment$61,565

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCHC CREATING HEALTHIER COMMUNITIES: $345,998 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetUNITED WAY OF EL PASO COUNTY: $140,102 over 2y, 2.3% of budgetMILITARY FAMILY AND VETERANS SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS OF AMERICA: $118,748 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetANIMAL CHARITIES OF AMERICA: $107,736 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetROADRUNNER FOOD BANK INC: $107,668 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetGlobal Impact: $72,328 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $68,657 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHEALTH & MEDICAL RESEARCH CHARITIES OF AMERICA: $67,245 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetANIMAL WELFARE FUND INC: $52,197 over 2y, 6.6% of budgetANIMAL HUMANE ASSOCIATION OF NEW MEXICO INC: $45,511 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetCATHOLIC SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS OF AMERICA: $45,448 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetAMERICA'S CHARITIES: $42,257 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCANCERCURE OF AMERICA- CARE UNDERSTAND RESEARCH & END: $41,933 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetBORDER PATROL MUSEUM AND MEMORIAL LIBRARY FOUNDATION: $41,323 over 2y, 4.5% of budgetEARTHSHARE: $37,789 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetCHILDRENS CHARITIES OF AMERICA: $37,756 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $37,591 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHRISTIAN CHILDRENS CHARITIES: $35,547 over 2y, 20% of budgetMILITARY SUPPORT GROUPS OF AMERICA: $34,830 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetCHRISTIAN CHARITIES USA: $33,832 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetCHILDRENS MED RES CHARITIES OF AMER DBA CHILDRENS MED & RES CHAR OF AMER: $29,829 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetCHILDREN FIRST - AMERICA'S CHARITIES: $28,504 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetMEDICAL RESEARCH CHARITIES INC: $26,911 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetHUMAN CARE CHARITIES OF AMERICA: $24,581 over 2y, 4.3% of budgetPublic Lands Foundation Inc: $23,776 over 2y, 18% of budgetLOCAL INDEPENDENT CHARITIES OF TEXAS: $21,446 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetAMERICAS MOST COST EFFECTIVE CHARITIES: $19,958 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetPAWS AND STRIPES INC: $18,969 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetSTOREHOUSE NEW MEXICO: $18,619 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCOMMUNITY SHARES OF COLORADO INC: $17,653 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetHEALTH FIRST - AMERICA'S CHARITIES: $17,221 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE NEW MEXICO: $15,290 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetWOMEN CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICE CHARITIES OF AMERICA: $15,198 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetPB&J FAMILY SERVICES INC: $12,762 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetUNITED SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS INC: $12,262 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF NEW MEXICO: $11,537 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetWILD ANIMALS WORLDWIDE: $9,905 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetEDUCATE AMERICATHE EDUCATION SCHOOL SUPPORT AND SCHOLARSHIP FUNDS COALITION: $8,911 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCHARITY WITHOUT BORDERS: $8,415 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES: $8,348 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNEW MEXICO VETERANS INTEGRATION CENTERS: $7,037 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCASA ESPERANZA INC: $6,929 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetWOUNDED WARRIORS FAMILY SUPPORT INC: $6,912 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetFOOD FOR THE POOR INC: $6,488 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHUMAN & CIVIL RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS OF AMERICA: $6,137 over 1y, 0.6% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Give Back FoundationThe United Way of Cen…Federal Employees Sup…United Way of South H…United Way of Greater…Global ImpactUnited Way of Greater…The United Way of the…United Way of Tucson …United Way of Kitsap …Rappahannock United W…United Way of Central…
Give Back FoundationWI74.1× affinity36 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Campaigning for Charities funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Campaigning for Charities. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Wounded Warrior Project Inc: 0% of income from government
  • Food for the Poor Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
05Through Plinth

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 54 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2018, released 2018. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Campaigning for Charities’ filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home