Loading…
· Public charity
CULLEN CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION
To provide financial resources to children suffering from cancer or with a disability.
$252k
Granted FY2024
11
Grants
4
Communities
$50k
Largest
01What you fund
0179% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.
Health$930kHuman Services$344kPhilanthropy$151kOther$369k
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2018
wishchild
2019
—
2020
health
2021
systembuildingessentia healthfoundations essentia
2022
—
2023
diabeteswishchild
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2024 · 11 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k3 grants · $24k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $169k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$24,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$4.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
- KAMP KACE$50,000
- MAKE A WISH FOUNDATION$40,000
- LEND A HAND UP$30,000
- RONALD MCDONALD$25,000
- OUTDOOR ADVENTURE FOUNDATION$25,000
- A01 FOUNDATION$24,000
- AMERICAN DIABETES ASSOCIATION ATTN UPPER MIDWEST$15,000
- HOSPICE OF THE RED RIVER VALLEY$10,000
- HOPE INC$8,750
- AMBUCS$8,000
- HOUSE OF EVERYDAY LEARNING$7,000
02The need
04
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 (FY17–24, $344k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11% — the area typically sits at 8%. 92% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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 line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
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, United Way ALICE — 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.
100%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.8M · 15 repeat orgs$8k to everyone else
15 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
15
1
Total granted
$1.8M
$8k
Still filing today
93%
0%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
HealthHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther
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
- MAMake a Wish Foundation8× · 2017–2024 · $225k · revenue +49%
- OAOutdoor Adventure Foundation8× · 2017–2024 · $200k · revenue +73%
- SHSanford Health Foundation2× · 2020–2022 · $151k · revenue +288%
Funded once
- AAMBUCSone grant, 2024 · $8k
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
Angel Foundation
We offer relief to cancer patients and their loved ones through financial assistance, education, and emotional support.
Health
2
South Dakota Foundation for Medical Care
Collaborate with partners to improve health outcomes.
Health
3
Beaver Dam Community Hospitals
We enrich lives to create healthy communities through meaningful relationships built on gratitude and philanthropy.
Health
4
Unmc Physicians
Our mission is to lead the world in transforming lives to create a healthy future for individuals and communities through premier educational programs, innovative research, and extraordinary patient care.
Health
5
Md Anderson Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Prairie du Chien Memorial Hospital
To ensure a lifetime of quality healthcare is available to the people of our region.
Health
7
Optometric Foundation of North Dakota
Improving lives by improving sight
Health
8
Disabled American Veterans of Minnesota
Providing for the rehabilitation and continuing welfare of america's disabled veterans and families.
Human Services
9
Prairie Lakes Healthcare Foundation
To raise funds to support and advance the health services available to the watertown, sd area.
Health
10
Minnesota Hospital Foundation
Advance individual & community through leadership, advocacy, and collaboration
—
11
Kansas Medical Foundation
Develop public educational programs promoting medicine.
Education
12
South Dakota Dental Foundation
The mission of the south dakota dental foundation is to improve the oral health of all south dakotans by educating dental professionals; by educating the public; by aiding in developing the future dental workforce; and, by serving…
Health
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of North Dakota and the most unlike its peers is American Diabetes Association. 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
14 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
10/14
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Health$930,000Other$369,460Human Services$344,000Philanthropy$150,870
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 Kamp Kace ↗
- Who funds Ronald McDonald ↗
- Who funds Make a Wish Foundation ↗
- Who funds Outdoor Adventure Foundation ↗
- Who funds Sanford Health Foundation ↗
- Who funds Lend a Hand Up ↗
- Who funds Hope Inc ↗
- Who funds Essentia Health Foundation ↗
- Who funds Dakota Medical Foundation ↗
- Who funds Pinky Swear Foundation ↗
- Who funds A01 FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN DIABETES ASSOCIATION ATTN UPPER MIDWEST ↗
- Who funds Wishes & More ↗
- Who funds HOSPICE OF THE RED RIVER VALLEY ↗
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.
Dakota Medical FoundationND22.5× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Dakota Medical Foundation · Sanford Group Return · The Barry Foundation · Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Dakota Caring Foundation · Fargo-Moorhead Area Foundation · Midcontinent Foundation · North Dakota Community Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · Dakota Medical Charities · Offutt Family Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund
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 organisation CULLEN CHILDREN'S 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.
2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: Kamp Kace.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
low risk
~60 months of operating runway; revenue contracted over 8 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
8 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 450452459 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on Kamp Kace, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 60 months of cash on hand.
- WatchSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
- WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 48% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Cullen Children's Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Cullen Children's Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
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