· Private foundation
Dejaco Foundation
Its FY2025 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
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k27 grants · $95k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $21k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ST TIMOTHY CATHOLIC CHURCH | $11,000 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $10,000 |
| ST BRIGID OF KILDARE | $7,500 |
| ST BRENDAN CHURCH | $5,000 |
| HABITAT FOR HUMANITY | $5,000 |
| GOOD WORKS INC ATHENS OH | $5,000 |
| ST JUDE | $5,000 |
| DC VOLUNTEER LAWYERS | $5,000 |
| SALVATION ARMY | $5,000 |
| LA SALLE HIGH SCHOOL | $5,000 |
| CROSS INTERNATIONAL | $5,000 |
| FOOD FOR THE POOR | $5,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON | $4,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $4,000 |
| BARNARD COLLEGE | $3,750 |
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, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +6% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
36 repeat relationships — 22 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $17k 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
- MFMid-Ohio Foodbank6× · 2020–2025 · $25k · revenue +5%
MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC3× · 2023–2025 · $25k · revenue +1%- VLVOLUNTEER LEGAL ADVOCATES5× · 2021–2025 · $23k · revenue +98%
Funded once
- COCINCINNATI ORATORY OF ST PHILIP NERone grant, 2020 · $7k
- TCTHE CINCINNATI ORATORY OF ST PHILIPone grant, 2021 · $7k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2021 · $6k
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.
To strengthen the capacity of United Ways across Ohio and to advance the common good for Ohioans.
Women's health clinic focusing on helping at-risk parents deal with issues related to prenancy and parenting.
Food & water watch conducts extensive research and public education to ensure the food and water we consume is safe, accessible and sustainably produced. so we can all enjoy and trust in what we eat and drink, we help people take charge of…
Mercy Health will provide assistance, support and direction to all of the health care institutions and activities operated and maintained by its Subsidiaries. The mission of Mercy Health in performing these activities shall be to provide a…
Lifewater international is a non-profit christian water development organization dedicated to effectively serving vulnerable children and families by partnering with underserved communities to overcome water poverty.
Accelerate the advancement of women leaders in the food industry. we believe in limitless opportunity for all women.
Creating a healthier community by empowering families to reach their breastfeeding goals.
Devworks international is dedicated to a society where all people enjoy the freedom to pursue their own sustainable development. we contribute to this by strengthening the capacity of local organizations.
United Food Bank unites communities to alleviate hunger.
Catholic Charities Southwestern Ohio serves and empowers people through God's love in their times of vulnerability. We do so through a full range of local services that engage the community in building solidarity.
At food connect, we're dedicated to bridging the gaps in our food system, working to end hunger and fostering healthier communities through our innovative initiatives and programs. we build scalable technologies that support last-mile…
Offer life-affirming choices for pregnancy and sexual health.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Food for the Poor Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Water Project Inc. 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 50 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% 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 11% 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.
20 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. 20 of the 91 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 Mid-Ohio Foodbank ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds VOLUNTEER LEGAL ADVOCATES ↗
- Who funds The Daughters of Saint Eliae Inc ↗
- Who funds FOOD FOR THE POOR INC ↗
- Who funds Cross International Inc ↗
- Who funds THE WATER PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds PREGNANCY CENTER PLUS INC ↗
- Who funds LIFECARE ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds University of Dayton ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S CARE 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.
Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Dejaco 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.
- Food for the Poor 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.