Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Private foundation

Chestnut Fund

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.

$2.9M
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$2.5M
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.

Philanthropy$10MPublic Benefit$4.7MInternational$2.5MCivil Rights$1.9MHuman Services$1.2MSocial Science$685kCommunity Improvement$475kEmployment$325kOther$0
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $50k–250k1 grant · $120k
  • $250k+2 grants · $2.8M
$350,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$55M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LUPINE FUND CO FIDELITY CHARITABLE GIFT FUND$2,465,000
EMMAS FUND$350,000
CENTER ON BUDGET AND POLICY PRIORITIES$120,000
02The need
03

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 (FY20–22, $420k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 90% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CONNECTICUT VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $150k → 12%URBAN MINISTRIES OF WAKE COUNTY INC: $25k → 8%STATE POWER FUND: $30k → 19%CONNECTICUT VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $125k → 12%URBAN MINISTRIES OF WAKE COUNTY INC: $15k → 8%CONNECTICUT VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $75k → 12%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 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

ME
VT
WA
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
IA
OH
CT
RI
CA
NM
NC
DC
GA

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.

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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$18M · 25 repeat orgs$4.1M to everyone else

25 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 22 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

25
17

Total granted

$18M
$4.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
+39%

Still filing today

84%
65%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
Public BenefitCivil RightsHuman ServicesSocial SciencePhilanthropyCommunity ImprovementOther

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

  • Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
    5× · 2020–2024 · $2.2M · revenue +12%
  • NM
    NEW MEXICO VOICES FOR CHILDREN
    3× · 2020–2022 · $900k · revenue +39%
  • TW
    THE WASHINGTON STATE BUDGET AND POLICY CENTER
    3× · 2020–2022 · $532k · revenue +9%

Funded once

  • OA
    ONE ACRE FUNDgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $2.5M · revenue +39%
  • WISCONSIN VOICES INC
    one grant, 2020 · $325k · revenue -89%
  • PM
    PROGRESS MICHIGAN EDUCATIONWE THE PEOPLE
    one grant, 2020 · $225k

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.

1
Institute for Public Accuracy

To teach and disseminate educational materials to the public.

Arts & Culture
2
Economic Opportunity Institute

Equip the public and public decision-makers with the policy research and practical tools they need to embed the values of fairness, care, and opportunity into the foundations of Washington's economy.

Community Improvement
3
Center for American Progress

The center for american progress (cap) is an independent nonpartisan policy institute that is dedicated to improving the lives of all americans through bold, progressive ideas, as well as strong leadership and concerted action. our aim is…

Civil Rights
4
Center for International Policy Inc

The center for international policy is a woman-led, progressive, independent nonprofit center for research, education, and advocacy working to advance a more peaceful, just, and sustainable u.s. approach to foreign policy. through…

International
5
State Policy Network

State policy network's (spn) mission is to catalyze thriving, durable freedom movements in every state, anchored with high-performing, independent think tanks.

Civil Rights
6
New Jersey Policy Perspective

New Jersey Policy Perspective (NJPP) is a nonpartisan think tank that drives policy change to advance economic, social, and racial justice through evidence-based, independent research, analysis, and strategic communications.

Arts & Culture
7
Association of Washington Cities

The association of washington cities builds connections between our state's diverse cities and towns, while providing our members with the support needed to thrive through delivery of data-driven education, nationally recognized pooling…

—
8
Dc Policy Center

The mission of the d.c. policy center is to arm decision makers with fact-based, unbiased, and reliable research and analyses to help create a vibrant local economy that can maximize opportunities for residents, workers, and businesses in…

Public Benefit
9
Progress Texas Institute

The Progress Texas Institute provides research and strategic communications on issues with the ultimate goal of increasing civic engagement.

Civil Rights
10
Washington Area Community Investment Fund Inc

The washington area community investment fund (wacif) is a nonprofit community loan fund focused on increasing equity and economic opportunity in the washington, dc area's underserved communities. wacif's mission is driven is driven by…

—
11
Wisconsin Policy Forum Inc

We conduct impartial public policy research and analysis to drive informed debate and effective decision-making in the state of wisconsin.

Public Benefit
12
State Innovation Exchange

The state innovation exchange (six) makes collaborative governance the norm among values-aligned state legislators in their partnership with issue advocates and grassroots leaders. through this practice, we commit to centering the people…

Civil Rights

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is State Voices and the most unlike its peers is Living Well Kent Collaborative. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyPolicy Research and AdvocacyCommunity FoundationsChild Abuse Advocacy Servic…Women & Girls Leadership De…Youth Development Services
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 31 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%0%<5yr14%10%5–10yr19%23%10–20yr16%20%20–35yr13%40%35–55yr16%7%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%0%<5yr14%3%5–10yr19%14%10–20yr16%37%20–35yr13%44%35–55yr16%2%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/35
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,530

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.

04the grantee network

35 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. 35 of the 44 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
34/35
Grantees still filing
24/35
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

LUPINE FUND CO FIDELITY CHARITABLE GIFT FUND — $9,105,000 · OtherLUPINE FUND CO FIDELITY CHARITABLE GIFT FUNDEMMAS FUND — $1,150,000 · OtherEMMAS FUND+17 more — $2,373,185 · Other+17 moreCenter on Budget and Policy Priorities — $2,245,000 · Public BenefitCenter on Budget a…THE WASHINGTON STATE BUDGET AND POLICY CENTER — $532,000 · Public BenefitTHE WASHINGTON STA…THE ECONOMIC PROGRESS INSTITUTE — $250,000 · Public BenefitTHE ECONOMIC PROGR…INSTITUTE ON TAXATION AND ECONOMIC POLICY — $225,000 · Public BenefitINSTITUTE ON TAXAT…PUBLIC ASSETS INSTITUTE INC — $175,000 · Public Benefit+3 more — $180,000 · Public BenefitONE ACRE FUND — $2,500,000 · InternationalONE ACRE FUN…NEW MEXICO VOICES FOR CHILDREN — $900,000 · Civil RightsWISCONSIN VOICES INC — $325,000 · Civil RightsALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ORGANIZING — $175,000 · Civil RightsPUSHBLACK — $125,000 · Civil RightsPROGEORGIA STATE TABLE INC — $100,000 · Civil RightsSTATE VOICES — $100,000 · Civil Rights+1 more — $6,000 · Civil RightsWashington Progress Fund — $420,000 · PhilanthropyMinnesota Council of Nonprofits Inc — $250,000 · PhilanthropyHOPEWELL FUND — $135,000 · PhilanthropyTRIANGLE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC — $75,000 · PhilanthropyMAINE CENTER FOR ECONOMIC POLICY — $460,000 · Social ScienceTHE URBAN INSTITUTE — $225,000 · Social ScienceCONNECTICUT VOICES FOR CHILDREN INC — $350,000 · Human ServicesURBAN MINISTRIES OF WAKE COUNTY INC — $40,000 · Human ServicesSTATE POWER FUND — $30,000 · Human Services
Other$12,628,185Public Benefit$3,607,000International$2,500,000Civil Rights$1,731,000Philanthropy$880,000Social Science$685,000Human Services$420,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetONE ACRE FUND — $2,500,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetCenter on Budget and Policy Priorities — $2,245,000 over 5y, 1.5% of budgetNEW MEXICO VOICES FOR CHILDREN — $900,000 over 3y, 13% of budgetTHE WASHINGTON STATE BUDGET AND POLICY CENTER — $532,000 over 3y, 12% of budgetMAINE CENTER FOR ECONOMIC POLICY — $460,000 over 3y, 14% of budgetWashington Progress Fund — $420,000 over 3y, 8.8% of budgetCONNECTICUT VOICES FOR CHILDREN INC — $350,000 over 3y, 14% of budgetOREGON CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY — $325,000 over 3y, 21% of budgetWISCONSIN VOICES INC — $325,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetMAINE PEOPLE'S RESOURCE CENTER — $315,000 over 3y, 3.9% of budgetMinnesota Council of Nonprofits Inc — $250,000 over 3y, 2.6% of budgetTHE ECONOMIC PROGRESS INSTITUTE — $250,000 over 3y, 14% of budgetTHE URBAN INSTITUTE — $225,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetFAITH IN ACTION NETWORK — $225,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetINSTITUTE ON TAXATION AND ECONOMIC POLICY — $225,000 over 3y, 3.1% of budgetTHE AMERICAN PROSPECT INC — $225,000 over 3y, 5.9% of budgetFuse Innovation Fund — $198,000 over 3y, 5.9% of budgetPUBLIC ASSETS INSTITUTE INC — $175,000 over 3y, 14% of budgetALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ORGANIZING — $175,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCOMMON GOOD IOWA — $150,000 over 2y, 9.2% of budgetHOPEWELL FUND — $135,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPUSHBLACK — $125,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetPROGEORGIA STATE TABLE INC — $100,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSTATE VOICES — $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetIOWA POLICY PROJECT — $100,000 over 1y, 98% of budgetBALLOT INITIATIVE STRATEGY CENTER FOUNDATION — $90,000 over 3y, 2.2% of budgetTRIANGLE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC — $75,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetMASSACHUSETTS COMMUNITIES ACTION NETWORK INC — $65,000 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetFUND FOR CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT — $60,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetURBAN MINISTRIES OF WAKE COUNTY INC — $40,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC — $30,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSTATE POWER FUND — $30,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetLIVING WELL KENT COLLABORATIVE — $28,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetSOME INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetChinese for Affirmative Action — $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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.

Center on Budget and …Annie E Casey Foundat…The Ford FoundationLimestone FoundationHopewell FundTides FoundationNew Venture FundImpactassetsincEconomic Security Pro…Economic Policy Insti…Wellspring Philanthro…Amalgamated Charitabl…
Center on Budget and Policy PrioritiesDC34.7× affinity14 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities · Annie E Casey Foundation Inc · The Ford Foundation · Limestone Foundation · Hopewell Fund · Tides Foundation · New Venture Fund · Impactassetsinc · Economic Security Project Inc · Economic Policy Institute · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc

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 Chestnut Fund 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    4get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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: 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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Chestnut Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Chestnut Fund 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 44 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    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 camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home
    State money flows
    the interactive map of money crossing state lines