How much did Charity Works grant in FY2024?

Arts & Culture$641kHealth$471kHuman Services$463kAnimals$160kEducation$144kYouth Development$79kEnvironment$78kFood & Nutrition$60kCivil Rights$31kOther$428k

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

poor underprivilegedunderprivileged giving

2019

poor underprivilegedunderprivileged giving

2020

poor underpriveleged

2021

poor underpriveleged

2022

poor underpriveleged

2023

poor underpriveleged

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

$10k–50k4 grants · $80k
$50k–250k1 grant · $105k

$20,000

Median grant

States reached

$678k

Total assets

Largest grants

McCallum Theatre$105,000
Chaparral High School$25,000
Animal Samaritans SPCA$20,000
Do the Right Thing$20,000
Boys & Girls Club CV$15,000

02The need

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:

Your human-services grants (FY18–23, $443k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12% — the area typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — 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.

68%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$1.7M · 18 repeat orgs$811k to everyone else

18 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 15 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$1.7M

$681k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+34%

+42%

Still filing today

100%

54%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 30% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $130k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

HealthHuman ServicesArts & CultureEducationCivil RightsYouth DevelopmentOther

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

MT
MCCALLUM THEATRE EDUCATION FOUNDATION
5× · 2018–2023 · $451k · revenue +34% · 72% of their budget
BS
BARBARA SINATRA CHILDREN'S CENTER
3× · 2020–2023 · $286k · revenue +40%
BS
BARBARA SINATRA CHILDREN'S CENTER
2× · 2018–2019 · $230k · revenue +5%

Funded once

MO
MUSICIANS ON CALLgraduated
one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +150%
YOUTH VILLAGESgraduated
one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +124%
TS
THREE SQUARE
one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -7%

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.

Disability Rights California

Drc defends, advances, and strengthens the rights & opportunities of people with disabilities.

Civil Rights

Palm Springs Chamber of Commerce

The Chamber was organized to strengthen business and commerce by promoting economic development in Palm Springs and the Coachella Valley.

—

The Salk Institute for Biological Studies

Basic research in the following: molecular biology & genetics, neuroscience, and plant biology.

Science & Tech

Scan Health Plan

Scan's mission is to keep seniors healthy and independent.

Health

The Desert Sanctuary Inc

To provide shelter and counseling for victims of domestic violence in the Barstow area.

Human Services

Institute for Public Strategies

to work alongside communities to build power, challenge systems of injustice, protect health, and improve quality of life.

Health

Valle Del Sol Inc

Valle del sol inspires positive change by investing in health and human services to strengthen families with tools and skills for self-sufficiency and by building the next generation of latino and diverse leaders.

Health

New Vista Ranch Inc

New vista is committed to providing people of all ages with intellectual and developmental disabilities, equitable opportunities, and supported living arrangements so that they may experience life to the fullest.

Human Services

Aids Legal Referral Panel of the San

To advance and protect the rights, dignity and health of people living with hiv/aids.

Health

San GabrielPomona Valleys

Provides services for persons with development disabilities.

—

Amvets Department of California

Provides veterans and their families with service programs such as service officers, welcome home & other various programs.

Public Benefit

California Court Appointed Special

The mission of california casa is to ensure that children and youth in the child welfare and juvenile justice systems have both a voice and the services they need to thrive. we achieve this by strengthening and empowering californias…

Civil Rights

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Barbara Sinatra Children's Center at Eisenhower and the most unlike its peers is Uc San Diego Foundation. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 34 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/62

the rest of the field

12%

22,290/186,916

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.

05the grantee network

54 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

54/54

Grantees still filing

39/54

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Arts & Culture$641,049Health$471,351Human Services$462,503Other$595,888Animals$160,234Education$143,600Youth Development$78,665

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.

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.

Bighorn Golf Club Charities IncCA50.2× affinity21 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Bighorn Golf Club Charities Inc · Inland Empire Community Foundation · The Auen Foundation · HN and Frances C Berger Foundation · The Grace Helen Spearman Foundation · Houston Family Foundation · Regional Access Project Foundation · The Galen Family Foundation · The Champions Volunteer Foundation · Impact Through Golf Foundation · Anderson Childrens Foundation · Coachella Valley Wellness 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 organisation Charity Works 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.

2025

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

0get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%

typical government reliance, FY20–25

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: MCCALLUM THEATRE EDUCATION FOUNDATION.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~145 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 7 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 330334165 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on MCCALLUM THEATRE EDUCATION FOUNDATION, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 145 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 72% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Charity Works?

Find your warmest path to Charity Works through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

Charity Works

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

54 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Charity Works?

More from the funding graph

Charity Works

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

54 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Charity Works?

More from the funding graph