· Private foundation
David C Butterfield and Alfonso D Rubio Memorial Foundation
Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 42% of DAVID C BUTTERFIELD AND ALFONSO D RUBIO MEMORIAL FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2023
- Under $10k4 grants · $13k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $110k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $529k
- $250k+2 grants · $9.0M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GALISTEO ART FOUNDATION | $8,715,247 |
| FOUNDATION FOR PUBLIC CODE NA | $250,000 |
| IMPACT AFRICA NETWORK | $200,000 |
| WHITNEY MUSEUM OF AMERICAN ART | $125,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE | $100,000 |
| UNICEF | $53,587 |
| YOUNGARTS | $50,000 |
| FAMILY REACH FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| GIRLS CLUB OF NEW YORK | $25,000 |
| LITTLE LIONS KENYA INC | $25,000 |
| ASPEN ART MUSEUM | $25,000 |
| THE GATEWAY COALITION FUND | $10,000 |
| FREDERICK DOUGLASS PROJECT | $5,150 |
| CARNEGIE HALL | $5,000 |
| ANDERSON RANCH ARTS CENTER | $2,325 |
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 (FY20–23, $617k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 85% 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +80% since the first grant, against -19% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2023, 5 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).
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 FY2023, 4% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9.2M 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
UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF2× · 2021–2023 · $10M · revenue +64%- WMWHITNEY MUSEUM OF AMERICAN ART3× · 2021–2023 · $2.0M · revenue +183%
- CICHILDREN IN CONFLICT INC2× · 2021–2022 · $500k · revenue +80%
Funded once
OPENCOLLECTIVE FOUNDATIONone grant, 2022 · $1.1M · revenue -100%- NNNATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTIONSone grant, 2022 · $936k
NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INCone grant, 2020 · $714k · revenue -54%
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.
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…
A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…
The npr foundation ("foundation") is organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of its sole supported organization, national public radio, inc. ("npr inc."). the foundation supports npr inc. through various activities such as…
To invest in america's finest artists and illuminate the value of artists to society.
Partnersglobal (partners) works through a global network to support local leaders and create partnerships that transform conflict, strengthen democratic institutions, and achieve sustainable development.
Npr international operations, inc. ("nprio") supports the international newsgathering activities of national public radio, inc. through bureaus and offices established locally in foreign countries.
Empowering financial professionals and consumers through world-class advocacy and education.
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
A nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to enhancing international peace and security in the 21st century, thereby retaining its focus on nuclear weapons but expanding to include other present emerging security threats.
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is One Fair Wage Inc and the most unlike its peers is William Loveland Foundation. 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 23 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 10% 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.
39 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. 39 of the 65 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 UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds WHITNEY MUSEUM OF AMERICAN ART ↗
- Who funds OPENCOLLECTIVE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MYRIAD USA INC ↗
- Who funds NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC ↗
- Who funds RESOLVE TO SAVE LIVES INC ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN IN CONFLICT INC ↗
- Who funds National Domestic Workers Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds ONE FAIR WAGE INC ↗
- Who funds SHARE OUR STRENGTH ↗
- Who funds ASPEN ART MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds THE ANTI-RECIDIVISM COALITION ↗
- Who funds COLLEGE TRACK ↗
- Who funds NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds NEW STORY INC ↗
- Who funds UNCOMMON LAW ↗
- Who funds La Casa de las Madres ↗
- Who funds WILLIAM LOVELAND FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GRID110 INC ↗
- Who funds THE SPRING OF TAMPA BAY INC ↗
- Who funds THE MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART LOS ANGELES ↗
- Who funds NURU INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds THE BAIL PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ADVANCEMENT IN THE ARTS 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.
Open a dossier: The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Tides Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc
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 David C Butterfield and Alfonso D Rubio Memorial 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.
- The Spring of Tampa Bay Inc — 33% of income from government
- National Foundation for Advancement in the Arts Inc — 0% of income from government
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 David C Butterfield and Alfonso D Rubio Memorial Foundation?
Find your warmest path to David C Butterfield and Alfonso D Rubio Memorial 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.