Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Connect Humanity

CONNECT HUMANITY works to expand digital access in rural, low and moderate-income, and historically underserved communities.

$419k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
10
States reached
$78k
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 FY20232025.

Community Improvement$972kYouth Development$371kHealth$50kReligion$10kEmployment$10k
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 13 grants below total $394,956 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $418,576 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $23,620 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $21k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $236k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $138k
$30,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$5.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GENERATION WEST VIRGINIA$78,000
FOOTHILLS REGIONAL COMMISSION$60,000
BUFFALO TRACE AREA DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT$39,856
ASHTABULA COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS$30,000
TRUMBULL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS$30,000
CITY OF PITTSBURGH$30,000
VIRGINIA COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP$30,000
GARRETT COUNTY$30,000
WHITFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS$24,807
SOUTHERN TIER 8 REGIONAL BOARD$21,000
ALLEGHENIES BROADBAND INC$9,488
DRIVE$6,000
BRADLEY COUNTY$5,805
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 (FY24–25, $120k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, 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%VIRGINIA COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $90k → 9%VIRGINIA COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $30k → 9%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

VT
MN
NY
OH
PA
KY
WV
VA
MD
TN
NC
LA
GA
TX
FL

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.

53%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$745k · 6 repeat orgs$668k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
16

Total granted

$745k
$496k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
0%

Still filing today

67%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 57% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $172k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’23’24’25
Community ImprovementYouth DevelopmentHuman ServicesScience & TechReligionOther

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

  • GW
    GENERATION WEST VIRGINIA INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $371k · revenue 0%
  • VC
    VIRGINIA COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $120k · revenue +52%
  • IP
    ISOTHERMAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
    2× · 2024–2025 · $120k · revenue -4%

Funded once

  • CO
    CENTER ON RURAL INNOVATION INC
    one grant, 2023 · $125k · revenue -19%
  • DI
    DELTA INTERFAITH
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -66% · 33% of their budget
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $27k

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
Greene County Industrial Developmen

Assist reliable businesses and industrial firms to locate to greene county, pa

Community Improvement
2
Red River Economic Development

Economic Development and Tourism Promotion in Eastern Kentucky

Community Improvement
3
Fayette County Industrial Development Corp D/B/a Economic Development Group

To procure, develop, and operate land and properties in order to create job opportunities and foster the economic development of connersville and fayette county.

Community Improvement
4
Invest Appalachia Inc

Invest appalachia (ia) is a regional impact investment platform designed by and for the people of central appalachia. ia provides blended investment capital to strengthen business opportunities, build equitable local wealth, advance…

Environment
5
Franklin County Economic Development Corporation

The edc is committed to serving new and existing businesses and industries, and to assist with the creation and retention of quality jobs through direct and collaborative funding of projects for the economic well being of franklin county.

Community Improvement
6
Dekalb County Economic Development Partnership Inc

Were on a mission to improve the quality of life for the citizens of dekalb county through the responsible growth of business and industry. our vision is to facilitate investment into making dekalb county a premier economic driver in…

Community Improvement
7
Gaston Innovation Group Inc

Gaston Innnovation Group, Inc., dba TechWorks Gaston, was formed for the purpose of improving the socio-economic conditions for citizens of Gaston County, North Carolina, by stimulating job growth through digital inclusion, small business…

Community Improvement
8
Tri-County Economic Development Corporation

Build a world-class economy in northern kentucky through the expansion of existing businesses and the creation and attraction of high quality, primary industry employers.

9
Lagrange County Economic Development Corporation

The lagrange county economic development corporation is the single point of contact for economic development efforts in lagrange county, indiana. we work with regional, state and federal partners to support and encourgage our clients'…

Community Improvement
10
Muhlenberg Economic Growth Alliance

The Corporation was formed to recruit and promote new and existing industrial business to Muhlenberg County and immediate area .

Community Improvement
11
Wilkes Economic Development Corporation

Economic development of wilkes county

Community Improvement
12
The Carolinas Gateway Partnership Inc

The carolinas gateway partnership is dedicated to the creation of community wealth through the retention, creation, and expansion of business opportunities in tarboro, rocky mount, and edgecombe county, north carolina.

Community Improvement

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Center On Rural Innovation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Meigs County Community Improvement. 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

12 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. 12 of the 29 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
4/12
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

BUFFALO TRACE AREA DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT INC — $60,000 · OtherBUFFALO TRACE AREA DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT …DRIVE — $60,000 · OtherDRIVETRUMBULL COUNTY CHILDREN SERVICES — $30,000 · OtherTRUMBULL COUNTY CHILDREN SERVICESGARRETT COUNTY — $30,000 · OtherGARRETT COUNTYCITY OF PITTSBURGH — $30,000 · OtherCITY OF PITTSBURGHASHTABULA COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS — $30,000 · OtherASHTABULA COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONSIndividual grant recipient — $27,000 · OtherCENTRE WISP VENTURE COMPANY LLC — $27,000 · OtherCITY OF FLEMING - NEON — $27,000 · OtherRED BIRD MISSION INC — $27,000 · OtherWASHINGTON COUNTY — $27,000 · OtherCounty of Jackson — $27,000 · OtherARISE ADELANTE — $25,000 · OtherCONASAUGA DRUG COURT — $24,807 · OtherSOUTHERN TIER 8 REGIONAL BOARD — $21,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $20,000 · Other+2 more — $15,805 · OtherGENERATION WEST VIRGINIA INC — $370,500 · Youth DevelopmentGENERATION WEST VIRGINIA INCCENTER ON RURAL INNOVATION INC — $125,000 · Community ImprovementCENTER ON RURAL INN…MEIGS COUNTY COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT — $27,000 · Community ImprovementMEIGS COUNTY COMMUN…GRAHAM REVITALIZATION ECONOMIC ACTION TEAM - GREAT — $27,000 · Community ImprovementGRAHAM REVITALIZATI…LA UNION DEL PUEBLO ENTERO — $25,000 · Community ImprovementLA UNION DEL PUEBLO…INSTITUTE FOR LOCAL SELF RELIANCE — $15,000 · Community ImprovementINSTITUTE FOR LOCAL…ALLEGHENIES BROADBAND INCORPORATED — $14,534 · Community ImprovementALLEGHENIES BROADBA…THE ENTERPRISE CENTER INC — $10,000 · Community ImprovementVIRGINIA COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC — $120,000 · Human ServicesVIRGINIA …ISOTHERMAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION — $120,000 · Science & TechISOTHERMA…DELTA INTERFAITH — $50,000 · Religion
Other$508,612Youth Development$370,500Community Improvement$243,534Human Services$120,000Science & Tech$120,000Religion$50,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetGENERATION WEST VIRGINIA INC — $370,500 over 2y, 6.5% of budgetCENTER ON RURAL INNOVATION INC — $125,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetVIRGINIA COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC — $120,000 over 2y, 5.5% of budgetISOTHERMAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION — $120,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetDELTA INTERFAITH — $50,000 over 1y, 33% of budgetRED BIRD MISSION INC — $27,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetMEIGS COUNTY COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT — $27,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetGRAHAM REVITALIZATION ECONOMIC ACTION TEAM - GREAT — $27,000 over 1y, 26% of budgetLA UNION DEL PUEBLO ENTERO — $25,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR LOCAL SELF RELIANCE — $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetALLEGHENIES BROADBAND INCORPORATED — $14,534 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetTHE ENTERPRISE CENTER INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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 GENERATION WEST VIRGINIA INC
  • Who funds CENTER ON RURAL INNOVATION INC
  • Who funds VIRGINIA COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP INC
  • Who funds ISOTHERMAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
  • Who funds DELTA INTERFAITH
  • Who funds RED BIRD MISSION INC
  • Who funds MEIGS COUNTY COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT
  • Who funds GRAHAM REVITALIZATION ECONOMIC ACTION TEAM - GREAT
  • Who funds LA UNION DEL PUEBLO ENTERO
  • Who funds INSTITUTE FOR LOCAL SELF RELIANCE
  • Who funds ALLEGHENIES BROADBAND INCORPORATED
  • Who funds THE ENTERPRISE CENTER 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.

Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors IncNY18.7× affinity8 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Windward Fund · Tides Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Connect Humanity 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%3%10%23%40%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 37%
  • Center On Rural Innovation Inc37% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
2report 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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Connect Humanity?

Find your warmest path to Connect Humanity 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 29 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph