Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Cnfa

To stimulate economic growth and improve livelihoods by cultivating entrepreneurship.

$17M
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$834k
Largest
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 FY20172024.

Food & Nutrition$15MInternational$11MCommunity Improvement$3.4MPublic Safety & Disaster$3.0MHealth$2.9M
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 9 grants below total $4,192,474 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $16,940,819 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $12,748,345 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $50k–250k2 grants · $317k
  • $250k+7 grants · $3.9M
$353,743
Median grant
6
States reached
$18M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORP (AMALIMA LOKO)$833,501
MERCY CORPS (AMALIMA LOKO)$819,965
HELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL (HKI)-NIGER YALWA$658,525
J E AUSTIN ASSOCIATES INC (NIGERIA AG - INVEST )$628,065
THE MANOFF GROUP (JSI) (AMALIMA AND LOKO)$353,743
DEVELOPMENT GATEWAY INC$306,309
HELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL (HKI) - MALI SUGU YIRIWA$274,911
MARKETSHARE ASSOCIATES INC (RWANDA HINGA WUNGUKE)$231,412
INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT GROUP LLC$86,043
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 (FY17–19, $3.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%SNV USA: $1.7M → 8%SNV USA: $1.1M → 8%SNV USA: $164k → 8%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

NY
OR
IN
CA
CO
VA
MD
DE
AZ
AR
DC
GA
TX

Grants abroad, by region — $12M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 4 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$8.7M · 71% · 55 grants

Stated purpose: PROGRAMMATIC SUPPORT · SUPPORTING COMMUNITY FOOD SECURITY

Russia and Neighboring States$3.2M · 26% · 96 grants

Stated purpose: PROGRAMMATIC SUPPORT

Middle East and North Africa$225k · 2% · 4 grants

Stated purpose: PROGRAMMATIC SUPPORT

Armenia$137k · 1% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: PROGRAMMATIC SUPPORT

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 21% of Cnfa’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. Read by recipient address, 23% of the giving stays in DC; read by stated purpose it is 15% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Cnfalessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 25% directed abroad (not shown)

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.

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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$34M · 21 repeat orgs$484k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +19% since the first grant, against -18% for the ones you funded once.

21 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 14 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
4

Total granted

$34M
$398k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+19%
-18%

Still filing today

48%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $86k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalHuman ServicesScience & TechSocial ScienceOther

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

  • IM
    INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORPS
    8× · 2017–2024 · $5.9M · revenue +82%
  • HK
    HELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL
    5× · 2020–2024 · $3.2M · revenue +47%
  • DG
    DEVELOPMENT GATEWAY INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $1.6M · revenue +5%

Funded once

  • AI
    AgriCorps Inc
    one grant, 2020 · $257k · revenue -18% · 67% of their budget
  • NA
    NATHAN ASSOCIATES INC
    one grant, 2020 · $81k
  • AS
    ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2017 · $32k

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
International Development Enterprises

See schedule o for a more detailed description of ide's mission statement and achievements.

International
2
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

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

International
3
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
4
International Budget Partnership

Ibp works with civil society, governments, international institutions and the private sector to bring about a world in which empowered citizens participate in open, inclusive public budgeting processes to shape policies and practices that…

International
5
Intrahealth International Inc

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

Health
6
Counterpart International Inc

For over 60 years, counterpart international has partnered with communities worldwide to turn local ideas into lasting solutions, connecting local vision with global opportunity. (continued on schedule o)we believe people closest to the…

International
7
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
8
Accion International

Our mission is to create a fair and inclusive economy where underserved people have quality financial choices and opportunities to improve their economic well-being. we find and help build innovative companies with the potential to reach…

International
9
Inclusive Development International

Inclusive Development International supports communities around the world to defend their rights and resources in the face of harmful corporate activities and internationally financed development projects, and we advocate for a more just…

International
10
Partnersglobal

Partnersglobal (partners) works through a global network to support local leaders and create partnerships that transform conflict, strengthen democratic institutions, and achieve sustainable development.

International
11
International Crisis Group

Crisis group works to prevent and resolve deadly conflict around the world by informing and influencing the perceptions and actions of policymakers and other key conflict actors. to this end, we endeavour to talk to all sides and provide…

International
12
Project Concern International

Pci is a global development organization that drives innovation from the ground up to enhance health end hunger, overcome hardship and advance women & girls-resulting in meaningful and measurable change in people's lives.

International

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Devworks International and the most unlike its peers is Helen Keller International. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

13 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 13 of the 27 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/13
Grantees still filing
9/13
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

JE AUSTIN — $4,057,443 · OtherJE AUSTINMERCY CORPS (AMALIMA LOKO) — $3,278,057 · OtherMERCY CORPS (AMALIMA LOKO)THE MANOFF GROUP INC — $2,198,837 · OtherTHE MANOFF GROUP INCCATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES — $1,419,183 · OtherCATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICESCONNEXUS CORPORATION (NIGERIA AG - INVEST ) — $1,306,702 · OtherCONNEXUS CORPORATION (NIGERIA AG - INVEST )AFRICARE — $1,233,503 · OtherAFRICAREMARKETSHARE ASSOCIATES INC (RWANDA HINGA WUNGUKE) — $789,028 · Other+8 more — $1,792,892 · Other+8 moreINTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORPS — $5,888,084 · InternationalINTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORPSHELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL — $3,182,573 · InternationalHELEN KELLER INTERNATIONALDEVELOPMENT GATEWAY INC — $1,563,075 · InternationalDEVELOPMENT GATEWAY INCCENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE ENTERPRISE INC — $1,381,397 · InternationalCENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE ENTERPRISE INCPLAN INTERNATIONAL USA INC — $1,357,142 · InternationalPLAN INTERNATIONAL USA INCWINROCK INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT — $591,023 · InternationalCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC — $567,608 · International+2 more — $348,812 · InternationalDEVWORKS INTERNATIONAL — $3,036,970 · Human ServicesDEVWORKS …GLOBAL COLD CHAIN FOUNDATION — $776,228 · Science & TechINNOVATIONS FOR POVERTY ACTION A NONPROFIT CORPORATION — $280,254 · Social Science
Other$16,075,645International$14,879,714Human Services$3,036,970Science & Tech$776,228Social Science$280,254

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 budgetINTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORPS — $5,888,084 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetHELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL — $3,182,573 over 5y, 1.2% of budgetDEVWORKS INTERNATIONAL — $3,036,970 over 3y, 13% of budgetDEVELOPMENT GATEWAY INC — $1,563,075 over 3y, 8.1% of budgetCENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE ENTERPRISE INC — $1,381,397 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetPLAN INTERNATIONAL USA INC — $1,357,142 over 6y, 0.9% of budgetAFRICARE — $1,233,503 over 4y, 3.8% of budgetGLOBAL COLD CHAIN FOUNDATION — $776,228 over 7y, 9.0% of budgetWINROCK INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT — $591,023 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC — $567,608 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetINNOVATIONS FOR POVERTY ACTION A NONPROFIT CORPORATION — $280,254 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetAgriCorps Inc — $256,560 over 1y, 67% of budgetINSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION INC — $92,252 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORPS
  • Who funds HELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL
  • Who funds DEVWORKS INTERNATIONAL
  • Who funds DEVELOPMENT GATEWAY INC
  • Who funds CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE ENTERPRISE INC
  • Who funds PLAN INTERNATIONAL USA INC
  • Who funds AFRICARE
  • Who funds GLOBAL COLD CHAIN FOUNDATION
  • Who funds WINROCK INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT
  • Who funds COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC
  • Who funds INNOVATIONS FOR POVERTY ACTION A NONPROFIT CORPORATION
  • Who funds AgriCorps Inc
  • Who funds INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION INC

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.

Gates FoundationWA14.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gates Foundation · 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 Cnfa 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    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 27 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 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