Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Ejm Fund

Its FY2021 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$200k
Granted FY2021
18
Grants FY2021
6
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What you fund
0196% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202021.

Housing & Shelter$60kFood & Nutrition$35kReligion$28kHealth$15kHuman Services$15kPhilanthropy$13kPublic Safety & Disaster$11kRecreation & Sports$10kOther$0
02FY2021 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2021

  • Under $10k7 grants · $28k
  • $10k–50k11 grants · $172k
$10,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CT FOOD BANK$25,000
BETH-EL CENTER$20,000
COLUMBUS HOUSE$20,000
TUNNELS TO TOWERS$20,000
IRIS$20,000
ORANGE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH$17,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
SARAH FOUNDATION$10,000
LIONS LOW VISION CENTER$10,000
AMERICAN RED CROSS$10,000
WOODRUFF FAMILY YMCA$10,000
TRANSGENDER LAW CENTER$5,000
MEALS ON WHEELS AMERICA$5,000
NATIONAL DIAPER BANK NETWORK$5,000
FOOD 4 KIDS$5,000
02The need
03

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 (FY21–21, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $10k → 12%NATIONAL DIAPER BANK NETWORK: $5k → 12%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein 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 — 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.

16%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$34k · 3 repeat orgs$182k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2021, 0 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
2

Total granted

$34k
$2k

Still filing today

0%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 10% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $180k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21
Housing & ShelterHuman ServicesPhilanthropyFood & NutritionCivil RightsOther

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

  • OC
    ORANGE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH
    2× · 2020–2021 · $28k
  • M
    MIT
    2× · 2020–2021 · $3k
  • CF
    COLBY FUND
    2× · 2020–2021 · $3k

Funded once

  • OV
    ORANGE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT
    one grant, 2020 · $1k
  • CB
    CHRISTIAN BROTHERS ACADEMY
    one grant, 2020 · $1k

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
The Food Bank for Central & Northeast Missouri

The food bank for central & northeast missouri is a regional disaster and hunger relief network that acquires and distributes millions of meals each year to help neighbors get the food they need to thrive. (continued on schedule o)the…

Food & Nutrition
2
United Food Bank

United Food Bank unites communities to alleviate hunger.

Food & Nutrition
3
Nourishing Hope

Nourishing hope provides food, mental health support, and social services to help all our neighbors thrive.

4
Behavior Analyst Certification Board Inc

We protect consumers of behavior analysis services by systematically establishing, promoting, and disseminating professional standards.

Employment
5
Harvesters - the Community Food Network

Harvesters mobilizes the power of our community to create equitable access to nutritious food and address the root causes and impact of hunger.

Food & Nutrition
6
Women's Foodservice Forum

Accelerate the advancement of women leaders in the food industry. we believe in limitless opportunity for all women.

Food & Nutrition
7
Foodshare Inc

Foodshare is leading an informed, coordinated response to hunger as part of the overall community effort to alleviate poverty in hartford and tolland counties.

8
American Flood Coalition Inc

To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.

Environment
9
Share

Share believes every person counts. together we pursue a stronger community by building relationships, advocating for equitable access to housing and food stability while empowering every individual to grow and thrive.

10
Montco Anti-Hunger Network

By leading coordinated action, montco anti-hunger network strengthens the food security safety net system in montgomery county, pa, working to end hunger in montgomery county.

Food & Nutrition
11
The Tahirih Justice Center

Tahirih's interdisciplinary, trauma-informed model combines free legal services to secure the rights and legal status that clients are entitled to under u.s. law, social services case management, nonpartisan policy analysis, and…

Civil Rights
12
Food Connect Co

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…

Food & Nutrition

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Meals On Wheels America and the most unlike its peers is National Diaper Bank Network Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

04the grantee network

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 20 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
8/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

ORANGE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH — $28,000 · OtherORANGE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCHCONNECTICUT FOODSHARE INC — $25,000 · OtherCONNECTICUT FOODSHARE INCTUNNELS TO TOWERS — $20,000 · OtherTUNNELS TO TOWERSIRIS — $20,000 · OtherIRISWOODRUFF FAMILY YMCA — $10,000 · OtherWOODRUFF FAMILY YMCAIndividual grant recipient — $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientLIONS LOW VISION CENTER — $10,000 · OtherLIONS LOW VISION CENTERFOOD 4 KIDS — $5,000 · OtherHIGH HOPES THERAPUTIC RIDERS — $5,000 · Other+4 more — $7,500 · Other+4 moreBETH-EL CENTER INC — $20,000 · Housing & ShelterBETH-EL CENTER INCCOLUMBUS HOUSE INC — $20,000 · Housing & ShelterCOLUMBUS HOUSE INCAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches — $10,000 · Human ServicesNATIONAL DIAPER BANK NETWORK INC — $5,000 · Human ServicesSARAH FOUNDATION INC — $10,000 · PhilanthropyMEALS ON WHEELS AMERICA — $5,000 · Food & NutritionTransgender Law Center — $5,000 · Civil Rights
Other$140,500Housing & Shelter$40,000Human Services$15,000Philanthropy$10,000Food & Nutrition$5,000Civil Rights$5,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetCONNECTICUT FOODSHARE INC — $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBETH-EL CENTER INC — $20,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetCOLUMBUS HOUSE INC — $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSARAH FOUNDATION INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS AMERICA — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTransgender Law Center — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL DIAPER BANK NETWORK INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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 CONNECTICUT FOODSHARE INC
  • Who funds BETH-EL CENTER INC
  • Who funds COLUMBUS HOUSE INC
  • Who funds SARAH FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches
  • Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS AMERICA
  • Who funds Transgender Law Center
  • Who funds NATIONAL DIAPER BANK NETWORK 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.

The Pfizer Foundation IncNY11.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Pfizer Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Ejm 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 23%
  • Columbus House Inc100% of income from government
  • Beth-El Center Inc23% of income from government
  • Connecticut Foodshare Inc5% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
1rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY2025

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 20 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph