· Private foundation
Diamond Mind Foundation
Its FY2024 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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k17 grants · $41k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $65k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HUMANILITY | $30,000 |
| DR NAOMI WOLF (SHERMAN P BENNETT AWARD RECEPIENT) | $20,000 |
| FORMERFEDSGROUP FREEDOM FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
| PUBLIUS NON PROFIT INC | $7,500 |
| SMART TANDEM LLC | $5,005 |
| AMERICA FIRST LEGAL | $5,000 |
| CODE OF VETS INC | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $3,000 |
| GIVESENDGO | $2,875 |
| TRINITY PREPARATORY ACADEMY | $2,500 |
| GEORGETOWN PREPARATORY SCHOOL | $1,000 |
| MTVA | $900 |
| Individual grant recipient | $675 |
| ALLOGRAPH LLC | $650 |
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 (FY17–24, $42k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 98% 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 +68% since the first grant, against +9% for the ones you funded once.
15 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 17 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 2% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $104k 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
- CUCLEMSON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION5× · 2017–2022 · $27k · revenue +143%
- MFMoms for Liberty2× · 2021–2024 · $20k · revenue ×16
- ASArborlea Study Center2× · 2022–2023 · $10k · revenue +68%
Funded once
- DFDOCUMENTARY FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $26k · revenue -94%
- BABETTER ANGELS NEW YORKone grant, 2019 · $20k
- TRTHE REASON FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +47%
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.
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.
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…
The fund for american studies (tfas) seeks to create a brighter, more prosperous future by preparing young people for leadership and teaching them the ideas of freedom and a free-market economy. founded in 1967, tfas organizes programs for…
The council on foreign relations (cfr) is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business executives, journalists, educators and…
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
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…
The mission of the freedom research foundation is to send americans to confront our enemies by empowering those who share our values. we believe in the foundational principles that made america the greatest political achievement in human…
Hudson Institute is a research organization promoting American leadership for a secure, free, and prosperous future.
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.
To provide thoughtful, conservative solutions to the challenges presented by education, workforce, labor and employment issues.
The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…
To educate the public on constitutional issues and public policy matters. We are dedicated to the principles of individual liberty, peace through strength, limited government, free enterprise, and the values embodied in the Declaration of…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Heritage Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Cana Academy. 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 25 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) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 25% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% 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.
45 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. 45 of the 87 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 Humanality ↗
- Who funds CLEMSON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DOCUMENTARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Moms for Liberty ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE REASON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Arborlea Study Center ↗
- Who funds FAUSTINA ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds HORIZONS GREATER WASHINGTON INC ↗
- Who funds CODE OF VETS INC ↗
- Who funds LIFE ASSET INC ↗
- Who funds America First Legal Foundation ↗
- Who funds Braver AngelsInc ↗
- Who funds THE CLAREMONT INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF STATESMANSHIP & POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY ↗
- Who funds EVERY BLACK LIFE MATTERS INC ↗
- Who funds RELIGIOUS FREEDOM INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds University of Dallas ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds TRINITY PREPARATORY ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds CANA ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds Christians Engaged ↗
- Who funds CARRY THE LOAD ↗
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: Donors Trust Inc · Bradley Impact Fund Inc · The Signatry Charitable Trust · Christian Community Foundation Inc · California Community Foundation · Servant Foundation · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment 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 Diamond Mind 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.
- Saint Michael's College — 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 Diamond Mind Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Diamond Mind 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.