· Private foundation
Carita Foundation-Ima
Its FY2025 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 FY2021–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k43 grants · $160k
- $10k–50k15 grants · $190k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND | $20,000 |
| ACADEMY OF NATURAL SCIENCES | $20,000 |
| CLIMATE SCIENCE LEGAL DEFENSE FUND | $15,000 |
| CHESTER COUNTY FOOD BANK | $15,000 |
| FOOD & FRIENDS | $15,000 |
| SHIPLEY | $15,000 |
| WHYY | $10,000 |
| PHILABUNDANCE | $10,000 |
| WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN | $10,000 |
| HELPING HARVEST FOOD BANK | $10,000 |
| CEASEFIREPA | $10,000 |
| GOOD SHEPHERD FOOD BANK | $10,000 |
| WOLFPAC | $10,000 |
| ALITE RESCUE FUND | $10,000 |
| NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS | $10,000 |
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 human-services grants (FY21–25, $112k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 66% 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +14% since the first grant, against +14% for the ones you funded once.
62 repeat relationships — 33 still active in FY2025, 29 since wound down; 25 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 58% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $147k 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
- FFFOOD & FRIENDS INC5× · 2021–2025 · $75k · revenue +22%
- SSSHIPLEY SCHOOL4× · 2021–2024 · $70k · revenue +14%
- TATHE ACADEMY OF NATURAL SCIENCES OF PHILADELPHIA4× · 2021–2025 · $50k · revenue +17%
Funded once
- TFTRINITY FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2024 · $20k · revenue +53% · 27% of their budget
- TNTRINITY NURSEY SCHOOLone grant, 2022 · $15k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $13k
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.
Our mission is to solve hunger in central pennsylvania by ensuring that everyone struggling with hunger has access to enough wholesome food every day. we will achieve this bold goal with the help of our generous donors, volunteers and…
Improve the food value chain in developing countries by mobilizing corporate volunteers to share knowledge and expertise with small and growing food processors.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
Founded in 1827, the pennsylvania horticultural society (phs) uses horticulture to advance the health and well-being of the greater philadelphia region. (continued in sch o)phs's work focuses on four impact priorities: creating healthy…
United way's mission is to end intergenerational poverty in our region by harnessing, leveraging and strategically investing the collective power of donors, advocates and volunteers, to help individuals and families break the cycle of…
The philadelphia school educates children for a future that is impossible to know but not impossible to shape. learn here. go anywhere.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
Women's law project creates a more just and equitable society by advancing the rights and status of all women throughout their lives. to this end, we engage in high-impact litigation, advocacy, and education. the core values of women's law…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Girls Who Code Inc and the most unlike its peers is Philadelphia Health Partnership. 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 35 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 9% 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.
88 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. 88 of the 141 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 FOOD & FRIENDS INC ↗
- Who funds SHIPLEY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds THE ACADEMY OF NATURAL SCIENCES OF PHILADELPHIA ↗
- Who funds THE GESU SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds CHESTER COUNTY FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds DONORSCHOOSEORG ↗
- Who funds LAUREL HOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds WHYY INC ↗
- Who funds Good Shepherd Food Bank ↗
- Who funds PROJECT HOME ↗
- Who funds ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF PHILADELPHIA ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES SOCCER FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE ↗
- Who funds VILLANOVA UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds TRINITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CRADLES TO CRAYONS INC ↗
- Who funds BRYN MAWR COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds Philabundance ↗
- Who funds DC ABORTION FUND ↗
- Who funds Caridad Center Inc ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE SCIENCE LEGAL DEFENSE FUND ↗
- Who funds ED SNIDER YOUTH HOCKEY & EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Coastal Maine Botanical Gardens Inc ↗
- Who funds METROPOLITAN AREA NEIGHBORHOOD NUTRITION ALLIANCE ↗
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: The Philadelphia Foundation · The William Penn Foundation · Connelly Foundation · United Way of Greater Philadelphia and Southern New Jersey · Chubb Charitable Foundation · The Pew Charitable Trusts · Hamilton Family Foundation · The Barra Foundation Inc · The Neubauer Family Foundation · Claneil Foundation Inc · Chester County Community Foundation · The Cigna Group 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 Carita Foundation-Ima 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.
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Cradles to Crayons Inc — 2% of income from government
- Caridad Center Inc — 0% of income from government
- Comfort Cases 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.