· Private foundation
Constructive Management Foundation
Its FY2022 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
Read this first · the figures below need context
99% of Constructive Management Foundation’s FY2022 grant dollars went to Donors Trust Inc, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2022 names 5 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2021, the last year Constructive Management Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 8 organizations, $8k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2022.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| St Eugene Catholic Church | $2,500 |
| The Buckeye Institute | $2,000 |
| Foundation for Economic Education | $1,000 |
| State Policy Network | $1,000 |
| American Insititute of Economic Res | $500 |
| Upper Midwest Law Center | $500 |
| US Holocaust Memorial Museum | $200 |
| The NC Arboretum Society | $125 |
| Brother Wolf Animal Rescue | $115 |
| Charity Water | $80 |
| Asheville Jewish Community Center | $60 |
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 (FY20–21, $180) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 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.
19 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2021, 11 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call). Read against FY2021, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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 FY2022, 29% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k 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
- SPSTATE POLICY NETWORK4× · 2017–2021 · $11k · revenue +90%
- RCRainbow Community School2× · 2018–2019 · $6k · revenue +42%
- ODOpen Doors of Asheville Inc3× · 2017–2019 · $5k · revenue +364%
Funded once
- CDCarolina Day School Incgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $18k · revenue +53%
- CICATO INSTITUTEgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue +70%
- UOUniv of N Carolina at Ashevilleone grant, 2020 · $510
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.
Mission statement of washington and lee university: washington and lee university provides a liberal arts education that develops students' capacity to think freely, critically, and humanely and to conduct themselves with honor, integrity,…
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
Wake Forest University, a 501(c)(3) institution of higher education, is dedicated to the pursuit of excellence in the liberal arts and in graduate and professional education. The organization is comprised of seven constituent parts: Wake…
Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan "fact tank" that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. Pew Research Center generates a foundation of facts that enriches the public dialogue and…
The r street institute is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, public-policy research organization ("think tank"). our mission is to engage in policy research and outreach to promote free markets and limited, effective government. (continued on…
The American Academy of Sciences and Letters (AASL) promotes scholarship and honors outstanding achievement in the arts, sciences, and learned professions. It encourages the fruitful exchange of ideas within academia and society at large…
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.
The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…
Wilson college empowers students to be confident and critical thinkers, creative visionaries, effective communicators, honorable leaders, and agents of justice.
The american constitution society for law and policy (acs) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit, non-partisan legal organization. through a diverse nationwide network of progressive lawyers, law students, judges, scholars, advocates, and many others,…
The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The John Locke Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Samaritan's Purse. 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 35 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 0% 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.
38 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. 38 of the 58 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 Donors Trust Inc ↗
- Who funds Carolina Day School Inc ↗
- Who funds STATE POLICY NETWORK ↗
- Who funds Rainbow Community School ↗
- Who funds JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF ASHEVILLE INC ↗
- Who funds Open Doors of Asheville Inc ↗
- Who funds HILLSDALE COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds The Buckeye Institute ↗
- Who funds UPPER MIDWEST LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds ASHEVILLE HUMANE SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds Asheville Art Museum Association Inc ↗
- Who funds Preservation Society of Asheville & Buncombe County Inc ↗
- Who funds Preserving a Picturesque America Inc ↗
- Who funds Penland School Of Craft ↗
- Who funds Foundation for Economic Education Inc ↗
- Who funds Citizens for Responsible Land Use ↗
- Who funds CATO INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds THE JOHN LOCKE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ↗
- Who funds SAMARITAN'S PURSE ↗
- Who funds LUCY BURNS INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds LITIGATORS FOR LIBERTY NETWORK ↗
- Who funds BUCKLEY INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds THE REASON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MANNA FOOD BANK INC ↗
- Who funds HOUSTON HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds LEAF GLOBAL ARTS ↗
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: The Community Foundation of Western North Carolina Inc · Dogwood Health Trust · The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation Inc · Bradley Impact Fund Inc · Donors Trust Inc · Foundation for the Carolinas · The Frances & William H Beattie Fdn · Richard Eckerd Foundation Inc · The Goodman Foundation Inc · Sarah Scaife Foundation Incorporated · Charles Koch Institute · John William Pope 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 Constructive Management 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Constructive Management Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Constructive Management 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.