· Private foundation
Charles R Whitney Charitable Foundation
Its FY2024 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 FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k33 grants · $118k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $45k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Intermountain Health Care | $25,000 |
| Corewell Health | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $10,000 |
| Sober Support Coalition | $7,000 |
| Vermont Food Bank | $7,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $7,000 |
| Planned Parenthood of Utah | $7,000 |
| Community Health Centers of Burlington Inc | $6,000 |
| For the Love of Dogs Vermont | $6,000 |
| Hinesburg Cemetery Fund | $5,000 |
| Grosse Pointe Animal Adoption Society | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| Planned Parenthood of Michigan | $5,000 |
| Joyineering Fund | $5,000 |
| Bayview Yacht Club Foundation | $4,000 |
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, $17k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +25% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.
41 repeat relationships — 29 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 7 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, 75% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $41k 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
- JFJOYINEERING FUND3× · 2020–2024 · $30k · revenue +106% · 100% of their budget
- HSHUMANE SOCIETY OF CHITTENDEN COUNTY5× · 2020–2024 · $20k · revenue +80%
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC3× · 2020–2022 · $18k · revenue +40%
Funded once
- CSCapuchin Soup Kitchenone grant, 2023 · $14k
- GTGrand Travers Community Foundationone grant, 2019 · $10k
- BHBeaumont Health Foundationone grant, 2019 · $10k
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.
Vermont public informs, educates, and entertains through public service journalism and enlightening content rooted in vermont. our storytelling enriches lives and fosters community connection and understanding.
The organization was founded by a group of concerned citizens, working in cooperation with the detroit city council, to shape food policy and to work for a more localized, more just, and environmentally friendly food system. the…
To improve and save lives through compassionate care, community engagement and advocacy for animals.
The vermont community foundation helps to build philanthropic resources to sustain healthy and vital vermont communities. the foundation connects and mobilizes people through giving to multiply the impact of philanthropy.
Informing and educating the public and decision makers about environmental issues.
Our mission is to ensure that the people of greater boston benefit from a vibrant, resilient, and inclusive waterfront, harbor, and islands; these spaces are equitable, accessible, and adapted to climate change; and to ensure our public,…
To care for and comfort our patients, residents, and their loved ones and to improve the health status of the communities we serve. the purpose of the organization is also to promote and support the development and maintenance of a highly…
Gdahc mission: together with our partners, we empower and improve the health and economic vitality of individuals, organizations and communities by catalyzing the power of collaboration. gdahc vision: healthy people. healthy community.…
The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.
The sole purpose of the svhc foundation shall be to engage in development and fundraising activities exclusively for the support of the southwestern vermont health care corporation and affiliates.
The coalition to protect michigan resources's mission is to be a strong voice for the equitable co-management of michigan's fisheries, with both the great lakes and inland lakes and streams, to insure that conservation principles remain in…
To maintain an integrated health delivery system of providers and hospitals resulting in improved health for our community by providing exceptional healthcare to our patients.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Forgotten Harvest Inc and the most unlike its peers is Olalashe 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 36 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) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 4% 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.
33 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. 33 of the 94 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 BEAUMONT HEALTH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds JOYINEERING FUND ↗
- Who funds GLEANERS COMMUNITY FOOD BANK OF SOUTHEASTERN MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds PAWS FOR LIFE ↗
- Who funds HUMANE SOCIETY OF CHITTENDEN COUNTY ↗
- Who funds VERMONT FOODBANK ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds Planned Parenthood of Northern New England Inc ↗
- Who funds MASTERS SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS OF BURLINGTON INC ↗
- Who funds CARPENTER-CARSE LIBRARY INC ↗
- Who funds FORGOTTEN HARVEST INC ↗
- Who funds Pride Center of Vermont Inc ↗
- Who funds Vermont Public Radio ↗
- Who funds VERMONT LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds FOR THE LOVE OF DOGS VERMONT LTD ↗
- Who funds GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE GREEN MOUNTAIN CLUB INC DEBONIS ↗
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: Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · Dte Energy Foundation · The Vermont Community Foundation · Thomas a Mackey Charitable Foundation · Lynn & Paul Alandt Foundation · National Life Group Charitable Foundation Inc · Charles Stewart Mott Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Network for Good
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 Charles R Whitney Charitable Foundation 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.
- Vermont Land Trust Inc — 42% of income from government
- Pride Center of Vermont Inc — 37% of income from government
- Community Health Centers of Burlington Inc — 17% of income from government
- The Green Mountain Club Inc Debonis — 17% of income from government
- Vermont Foodbank — 13% of income from government
- Neskowin Coast Foundation — 2% of income from government
- Planned Parenthood of Northern New England Inc — 2% of income from government
- Carpenter-Carse Library 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.