How much did Daffy Charitable Fund grant in FY2024?

Education$6.8MReligion$4.3MInternational$4.2MCommunity Improvement$4.0MPhilanthropy$3.5MHuman Services$2.2MHealth$2.0MArts & Culture$921kFood & Nutrition$826kOther$17M

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

2021

eyehyderabadoperation

2022

religousprotectiongfnsplayparticipationcomputer sciencewe're

2023

knowledgekidsfosterministriesretreatslong-termdonations

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 809 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k256 grants · $1.7M
$10k–50k443 grants · $8.1M
$50k–250k91 grants · $8.9M
$250k+19 grants · $16M

$11,560

Median grant

States reached

$334M

Total assets

Largest grants

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund$3,345,997
Muslim Community of Folsom$3,192,800
Heroic Hearts Project$1,175,000
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints$1,011,917
The Earth Species Project$1,005,000
Silicon Valley Community Foundation$1,000,000
The Infinite Node Foundation$700,000
Central Fund of Israel$676,360
The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University$586,081
University of California San Francisco Foundation$536,871
Make a Difference Ministries Inc$525,100
CenterPointe Church$406,000
The Good Food Institute$365,500
Wake Forest University$350,000
Oshman Family Jewish Community Center$345,857

02The need

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 (FY22–24, $2.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 13% — the area typically sits at 9%. 87% 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.

Where the work is directed

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

About 22% of Daffy Charitable Fund’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, 34% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 28% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Daffy Charitable Fundlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address

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.

45%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$21M · 197 repeat orgs$25M to everyone else

197 repeat relationships — 182 still active in FY2024, 15 since wound down; 627 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

197

124

Total granted

$21M

$2.9M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+50%

+65%

Still filing today

72%

77%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 37% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $22M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationHuman ServicesInternationalHealthPhilanthropyReligionOther

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

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
3× · 2022–2024 · $3.9M · revenue +47%
HH
Heroic Hearts Project Inc
2× · 2023–2024 · $1.3M · revenue +578%
The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University
3× · 2022–2024 · $747k · revenue +32%

Funded once

AH
Adventist HealthCare Incgraduated
one grant, 2023 · $700k · revenue +26%
RF
Reason For Hope Incgraduated
one grant, 2023 · $250k · revenue +132%
AI
Athletes in Action Sports Complex and Retreat Center
one grant, 2023 · $200k

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.

American Jewish World Service Inc

We work to realize human rights and end poverty in africa, asia, latin america and the caribbean.

International

Witness Inc

Witness helps people use video and technology to protect and defend human rights. the organization operates globally. witness' global team designs solutions, provides guidance, and co-develops strategies that enable human rights defenders…

International

Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

the organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the UCSF Foundation.

Education

Silicon Schools Fund Inc

Support the launch of excellent new schools and innovative practices that improve education.

Education

Yavneh Day School

Committed to academic excellence in general and jewish studies within a strong, vibrant community.

Education

Global Fund for Children

To advance the rights and opportunities of children and youth worldwide.

Arts & Culture

United States Naval Institute

To advance professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power.

—

Fajr Scientific

To deliver life-saving medical, humanitarian, and educational support to vulnerable populations around the world.

Science & Tech

Georgetown University

Georgetown university is one of the world's leading academic and research institutions. established in 1789, georgetown is the nation's oldest catholic and jesuit university.

Education

International Aids Vaccine

Translate scientific discoveries into affordable, globally accessible public health solutions

International

Pathfinder International

Pathfinder builds lasting and trusted local partnerships to strengthen health systems, forging resilient pathways to sexual and reproductive health and rights for all.

International

International Biomedical Research

We empower promising biomedical researchers through: a) financially supporting international collaborative research b) providing professional & career development c) creating a well-resourced networking platform

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Friends of the World Food Program Inc and the most unlike its peers is Museum of Chinese in America. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 27 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 9% of your grantees by number, and just 10% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.2% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.2%2/948

the rest of the field

11%

206,162/1,818,617

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.

06the grantee network

649 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

180

Early backer (in before they grew)

640/649

Grantees still filing

532/649

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$20,607,985Education$6,793,062Religion$4,289,895International$4,218,486Community Improvement$3,999,337Philanthropy$3,494,669Human Services$2,246,911

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.

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.

Jewish Community Federation of SanCA35× affinity28 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Community Federation of San · The San Francisco Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Walter and Elise Haas Fund · Marin Community Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund · United Way of the Bay Area · Bright Funds Foundation · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · The William & Flora Hewlett 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 organisation Daffy Charitable Fund 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

14get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%

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: Colorado Polling Institute.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

2 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 932075792 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 Colorado Polling Institute, 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

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
WatchSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 96% 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 Daffy Charitable Fund?

Find your warmest path to Daffy Charitable Fund 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.

Daffy Charitable Fund

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

649 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Daffy Charitable Fund?

More from the funding graph

Daffy Charitable Fund

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

649 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Daffy Charitable Fund?

More from the funding graph