· Private foundation
Change of Path
PROVIDES FINANCIAL GRANTS TO SUPPORT NOT-FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE COMBATTING SEX TRAFFICKING, WHILE ALSO RAISING AWARENESS OF THE SEX TRAFFICKING CRISIS BOTH DOMESTICALLY AND INTERNATIONALLY.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| TIDES CENTER FISCAL SPONSOR FOR WORLD WITHOUT EXPLOITATION | $30,000 |
| CHAB DAI INTERNATIONAL | $30,000 |
| JUSTICE AT LAST | $30,000 |
| DARK BALI | $30,000 |
| HEAL TRAFFICKING INC | $30,000 |
| AZADI INC | $30,000 |
| EMPOWER HER NETWORK | $30,000 |
| PREVENTION NOW | $30,000 |
| BEST | $30,000 |
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 (FY20–24, $165k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 45% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 8% of Change of Path’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.
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.
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 +267% since the first grant, against +51% for the ones you funded once.
9 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $90k 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
- JAJUSTICE AT LAST INC5× · 2020–2024 · $165k · revenue +295%
- BEBusinesses Ending Slavery & Trafficking4× · 2021–2024 · $150k · revenue +1%
- HTHEAL TRAFFICKING INC5× · 2020–2024 · $150k · revenue +267%
Funded once
- WIWillow International Everfreegraduatedone grant, 2020 · $45k · revenue +168%
- CDCHAB DAI IN CAMBODIAone grant, 2023 · $30k
- MIMOTIVATING INSPIRING SUPPORTING AND SERVING SEXUALLY EXPLOITED YOUTHone grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue +22%
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.
The mission of the organization is to end the trafficking and sexual exploitation of women and girls worldwide. it promotes the human rights of women and girls by working internationally to combat commercial sexual exploitation in all its…
The National Trafficking Sheltered Alliance is a network of service providers committed to enhancing services and increasing access to care for survivors of human trafficking and sexual exploitation.
Engaging first responders, tribes, and other stakeholders in eliminating human trafficking through solution-based knowledge and trauma-informed strategies. Empowering survivors to heal and build self-sufficient affirming lives
Freed Life exists to eradicate human trafficking through empowering survivors, equipping communities and changing systems.
Mukti is a Sanskrit word that means "freedom from oppression and exploitation". Our goal is to see women and children find pathways to freedom. We partner with organizations around Asia that are on the frontlines helping to rescue and…
To prevent sex slavery by changing the world view of affected communities and to liberate those already enslaved by providing safe environments for healing, and business opportunities that lead to full and transformed lives.
Human Rights Organization
Jvis mission is to bring freedom, justice, and restoration to men, women, and children suffering from human trafficking and other extreme injustice by partnering with local organizations and global stakeholders.
We are an intervention focused, counter human trafficking organization.
Ending impunity for conflict related sexual violence
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Heal Trafficking Inc and the most unlike its peers is Justice At Last Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
15 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. 15 of the 17 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 EPIK PROJECT ↗
- Who funds JUSTICE AT LAST INC ↗
- Who funds Businesses Ending Slavery & Trafficking ↗
- Who funds HEAL TRAFFICKING INC ↗
- Who funds EMPOWER HER NETWORK INC DBA EMPOWERED NETWORK ↗
- Who funds 10 THOUSAND WINDOWS INC ↗
- Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SURVIVOR ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds PREVENTION NOW INC ↗
- Who funds Willow International Everfree ↗
- Who funds AZADI INC ↗
- Who funds CHAB DAI INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds Dark Bali ↗
- Who funds MOTIVATING INSPIRING SUPPORTING AND SERVING SEXUALLY EXPLOITED YOUTH ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS FOR CHILDREN FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS ↗
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: Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Network for Good · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Change of Path 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Empower Her Network Inc Dba Empowered Network — 47% of income from government
- Prevention Now Inc — 5% 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 Change of Path?
Find your warmest path to Change of Path 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.