Skip to content
Child Relief International Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Child Relief International Foundation

Its FY2020 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$2.4M
Granted FY2019
24
Grants FY2019
9
States reached
$300k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2019.

Health$3.3MInternational$1.9MPhilanthropy$1.7MSocial Science$300kEducation$264kCommunity Improvement$200kHousing & Shelter$160kFood & Nutrition$125kOther$0
02FY2019 · 24 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2019

  • $10k–50k6 grants · $169k
  • $50k–250k17 grants · $1.9M
  • $250k+1 grant · $300k
$96,667
Median grant
9
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MUSO INC$300,000
SPARK MICROGRANTS$200,000
NETWORK FOR GOOD (THE IHANGANE PROJECT)$200,000
EARTHENABLE$160,000
THE FISTULA FOUNDATION$150,000
STRONG MINDS$150,000
D-REV DESIGN FOR THE OTHER NINETY PERCENT$150,000
PARTNERS IN HEALTH$125,000
ASPEN INSTITUTE$100,000
LWALA COMMUNITY ALLIANCE$100,000
WATSI INC$100,000
GARDENS FOR HEALTH INTERNATIONAL$96,667
PIVOT$75,000
SEED GLOBAL HEALTH$75,000
SHINING HOPE FOR COMMUNITIES$62,500
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–19) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 72% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%HOPE THROUGH HEALTH: $230k → 7%PROJECT HEALTHY CHILDREN: $63k → 11%WILLIAMS COLLEGE: $55k → 12%PIVOT: $75k → 16%NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST (UBS OPTIMUS): $1.0M → 7%THE DRAPER RICHARDS FOUNDATION: $259k → 7%THE FISTULA FOUNDATION: $150k → 8%D-PRIZE: $50k → 10%SHINING HOPE FOR COMMUNITIES: $63k → 17%ASPEN INSTITUTE: $200k → 14%LWALA COMMUNITY ALLIANCE: $100k → 14%PATH: $150k → 9%STRONG MINDS: $150k → 16%PARTNERS IN HEALTH: $125k → 7%MICROBIOME HEALTH RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $60k → 8%THE FISTULA FOUNDATION: $100k → 8%D-REV DESIGN FOR THE OTHER NINETY PERCENT: $150k → 10%SHINING HOPE FOR COMMUNITIES: $63k → 17%ASPEN INSTITUTE: $100k → 14%LWALA COMMUNITY ALLIANCE: $100k → 14%COMMUNITY HEALTH IMPACT COALITION: $62k → 9%STRONG MINDS: $100k → 16%PARTNERS IN HEALTH: $100k → 7%MICROBIOME HEALTH RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $50k → 8%THE FISTULA FOUNDATION: $75k → 8%D-REV DESIGN FOR THE OTHER NINETY PERCENT: $150k → 10%GLOBAL HEALTH CORPS INC: $50k → 17%NETWORK FOR GOOD (THE IHANGANE PROJECT): $200k → 14%STRONG MINDS: $73k → 16%INTEGRATE HEALTH: $100k → 7%SEED GLOBAL HEALTH: $275k → 16%D-REV DESIGN FOR THE OTHER NINETY PERCENT: $150k → 10%1000 DAYS: $125k → 14%SEED GLOBAL HEALTH: $200k → 16%MUSO INC: $466k → 10%SPARK MICROGRANTS: $200k → 17%NETWORK FOR GOOD (THE IHANGANE PROJECT): $75k → 14%PARTNERS IN HEALTH: $75k → 16%MUSO INC: $400k → 10%SPARK MICROGRANTS: $150k → 17%SEED GLOBAL HEALTH: $75k → 16%MUSO INC: $300k → 10%SPARK MICROGRANTS: $100k → 17%GARDENS FOR HEALTH INTERNATIONAL: $97k → 16%WATSI INC: $100k → 10%GARDENS FOR HEALTH INTERNATIONAL: $93k → 16%WATSI INC: $100k → 10%GARDENS FOR HEALTH INTERNATIONAL: $80k → 16%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
NY
MA
PA
NJ
CA
AZ
TN
DC
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$6.8M · 20 repeat orgs$1.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +120% since the first grant, against -2% for those funded once.

20 repeat relationships: 18 still active in FY2019, 2 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
15

Total granted

$6.8M
$850k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+120%
-2%

Still filing today

85%
47%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2019, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $361k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19
InternationalHealthPhilanthropyEducationScience & TechSocial ScienceOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • MI
    MUSO INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $1.2M · revenue +209%
  • SG
    SEED GLOBAL HEALTH
    3× · 2017–2019 · $550k · revenue +99%
  • SM
    SPARK MICROGRANTS INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $450k · revenue +280%

Funded once

  • DR
    DRAPER RICHARDS KAPLAN FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $259k · revenue -2%
  • P
    PATH
    one grant, 2018 · $150k · revenue +14%
  • 1D
    1000 DAYS
    one grant, 2018 · $125k · revenue -88%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
2
Intrahealth International Inc

Our mission is to improve the performance of health workers and strengthen the systems in which they work.

Health
3
Mali Health Organizing Project Inc

Mali Health improves maternal and child health by supporting women, communities, and the community health system to develop local solutions that ensure every mother and child has access to quality primary care. We aim to end preventable…

Community Improvement
4
MRIGlobal

To improve the lives of people through innovative scientific and engineering research.

Science & Tech
5
MaineGeneral Health

To enhance, every day, the health of our patients, our families and our communities. We do that through a range of health care services for people of all ages, in a variety of care settings.

Health
6
Living Goods

Living goods aims to save lives at scale by supporting digitally empowered community health workers. we work with governments and partners to leverage smart mobile technology, rigorously strengthen performance, and relentlessly innovate to…

International
7
Fajr Scientific

To provide multi-specialty surgical care, humanitarian aid and educational support to people in low- and middle-income countries.

Science & Tech
8
Bio Ventures for Global Health

BVGH drives sustainable, market-informed solutions to improve access to quality healthcare in low- and middle-income countries. BVGH builds cross-sector partnerships that align industry, government, and local health-system priorities to…

Health
9
Devworks International

Devworks international is dedicated to a society where all people enjoy the freedom to pursue their own sustainable development. we contribute to this by strengthening the capacity of local organizations.

Human Services
10
Health Strategy and Delivery Foundation

To be the leading thought partner and trusted advisor to a multitude of stakeholders for developing effective solutions and driving transformative impact in the health and social sector in Nigeria and the African Continent.

International
11
Handicap International

Handicap international dba humanity & inclusion (hi) works with people with disabilities and people living in situations of vulnerability, including poverty, exclusion, conflict, and disaster.

International
12
Essential Impact Inc

Essential impact creates breakthrough solutions to tackle malnutrition and transform food systems in sub-saharan africa. we leverage advances in fermentation to create affordable, accessible, and climate-resilient proteins that can be…

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is 1000 Days; the most unlike its peers is Gould Family Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

28 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 28 of the 42 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
27/28
Grantees still filing
19/28
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MUSO INC: $1,166,000 · InternationalMUSO INCSPARK MICROGRANTS INC: $450,000 · InternationalSPARK MICROGRANTS INCSTRONGMINDS INC: $323,450 · InternationalSTRONGMINDS INCGARDENS FOR HEALTH INTERNATIONAL: $270,000 · InternationalGARDENS FOR HEALTH INTERNATIONALLwala Community Alliance: $200,000 · InternationalLwala Community AllianceEARTHENABLE INC: $160,000 · InternationalEARTHENABLE INCPATH: $150,000 · InternationalPROJECT HEALTHY CHILDREN INC: $125,000 · International+1 more: $90,000 · InternationalNATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST (UBS OPTIMUS): $1,031,592 · OtherNATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TR…NETWORK FOR GOOD (THE IHANGANE PROJECT): $275,000 · OtherNETWORK FOR GOOD (THE IHA…1000 DAYS: $125,000 · Other1000 DAYSKOMO LEARNING CENTERS: $83,810 · OtherCOMMUNITY HEALTH IMPACT COALITION: $61,666 · Other+10 more: $232,300 · Other+10 moreIntegrate Health Inc: $330,000 · HealthIntegrate Health IncThe Fistula Foundation: $325,000 · HealthThe Fistula Foundati…PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $300,000 · HealthPARTNERS IN HEALTH A…WATSI INC: $200,000 · HealthWATSI INCOPENBIOME FOUNDATION INC: $110,000 · HealthOPENBIOME FOUNDATION…MEDIC MOBILE INC: $96,000 · HealthMEDIC MOBILE INCJACARANDA HEALTH: $50,000 · HealthGLOBAL HEALTH CORPS INC: $50,000 · HealthSEED GLOBAL HEALTH: $550,000 · EducationSEED GLOBA…SHINING HOPE FOR COMMUNITIES INC: $125,000 · EducationSHINING HO…Williams College: $55,000 · EducationWilliams C…Equalize Health Formerly D-Rev: $450,000 · Science & TechDRAPER RICHARDS KAPLAN FOUNDATION: $258,588 · PhilanthropyVISIONSPRING INC: $50,000 · PhilanthropyGOULD FAMILY FOUNDATION: $17,528 · Philanthropy+2 more: $3,250 · PhilanthropyTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $300,000 · Social Science
International$2,934,450Other$1,809,368Health$1,461,000Education$730,000Science & Tech$450,000Philanthropy$329,366Social Science$300,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMUSO INC: $1,166,000 over 3y, 8.0% of budgetSEED GLOBAL HEALTH: $550,000 over 3y, 3.6% of budgetSPARK MICROGRANTS INC: $450,000 over 3y, 9.3% of budgetEqualize Health Formerly D-Rev: $450,000 over 3y, 7.8% of budgetIntegrate Health Inc: $330,000 over 2y, 20% of budgetThe Fistula Foundation: $325,000 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetSTRONGMINDS INC: $323,450 over 3y, 3.8% of budgetTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $300,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $300,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetGARDENS FOR HEALTH INTERNATIONAL: $270,000 over 3y, 12% of budgetLwala Community Alliance: $200,000 over 2y, 4.2% of budgetWATSI INC: $200,000 over 2y, 4.1% of budgetEARTHENABLE INC: $160,000 over 1y, 5.7% of budgetPATH: $150,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget1000 DAYS: $125,000 over 1y, 4.7% of budgetPROJECT HEALTHY CHILDREN INC: $125,000 over 3y, 2.8% of budgetSHINING HOPE FOR COMMUNITIES INC: $125,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetOPENBIOME FOUNDATION INC: $110,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetMEDIC MOBILE INC: $96,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetPIVOT WORKS INC: $90,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetWilliams College: $55,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVISIONSPRING INC: $50,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetJACARANDA HEALTH: $50,000 over 1y, 6.0% of budgetGLOBAL HEALTH CORPS INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetBoston Foundation Inc: $2,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetASSOCIATION OF SMALL FOUNDATIONS: $750 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Mulago FoundationSilicon Valley Commun…Dovetail Impact Found…Greater Houston Commu…Sall Family FoundationThe Ray and Tye Noord…Rippleworks IncGates FoundationCri Foundation IncThe Iroh Foundation (…ImpactassetsincSegal Family Foundati…
Mulago FoundationNY30.5× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Mulago Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Dovetail Impact Foundation (Fka David Weekley Family Foundation) · Greater Houston Community Foundation · Sall Family Foundation · The Ray and Tye Noorda Foundation · Rippleworks Inc · Gates Foundation · Cri Foundation Inc · The Iroh Foundation (Fka Ra5 Foundation) · Impactassetsinc · Segal Family Foundation Inc

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Child Relief International Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Child Relief International Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 60%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation: 0% of income from government
  • Williams College: 0% of income from government
  • Boston Foundation Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
6get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Child Relief International Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Child Relief International Foundation 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 42 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2020) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2019, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Child Relief International’s filings →

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 endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home