· Private foundation
Elaine and Vincent Bell 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 FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| COMMUNITY VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE | $8,000 |
| TIDES CENTER | $7,000 |
| NATIVE MOVEMENT | $6,700 |
| PREVENTION POINT PHILADELPHIA | $5,900 |
| GREATER FAIRBANKS COMMUNITY HOSPITA | $5,000 |
| CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS | $4,200 |
| THE FOOD TRUST | $4,000 |
| THE ALASKA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $4,000 |
| BELLINGHAM FOOD BANK | $3,500 |
| WHITE CENTER FOOD BANK | $3,500 |
| NATIONALITIES SERVICE CENTER OF PHI | $3,300 |
| SEPIA | $3,200 |
| NEIGHBORWORKS MONTANA | $3,000 |
| SOCIAL JUSTICE FUND NW | $3,000 |
| PHILADELPHIA FILM SOCIETY | $3,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $37k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 79% 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 +50% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.
66 repeat relationships — 17 still active in FY2025, 49 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, 77% 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
- NMNATIVE MOVEMENT9× · 2017–2025 · $57k · revenue +945%
- CVCOMMUNITY VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE7× · 2017–2025 · $46k · revenue +120%
THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC9× · 2017–2025 · $34k · revenue +69%
Funded once
- WWEXPone grant, 2020 · $4k
- LPLYDIA PLACEone grant, 2024 · $3k · revenue 0%
- IGIngersoll Gender Centergraduatedone grant, 2023 · $3k · revenue +277%
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.
We empower directors and transform boards to be future ready.
The association of washington cities builds connections between our state's diverse cities and towns, while providing our members with the support needed to thrive through delivery of data-driven education, nationally recognized pooling…
Fsc i&p promotes environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable management of the world's forests. this mission aligns with the forest stewardship council (fsc), its network of offices, and other organizations.…
Common future is a network of pioneering leaders across the u.s. and canada who work deeply within their communities to create alternative approaches to business, philanthropy, and investing. we envision an economy that has transitioned…
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Empowering college admission counseling professionals through education, advocacy, and community.
The common application is a not-for-profit membership organization of over 1,100 colleges and universities across the globe committed to access, equity, and integrity in the college admission process. every year, over 1.5 million students…
Building a movement of diverse, upwardly mobile college grads overcoming underemployment through digital skills and peer connections.
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 lead, serve and collaborate to mobilize enduring philanthropy for a better arizona.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
Marin humane transforms lives through exceptional animal care, humane education, and advocacy. every day, marin humane inspires compassion and positive relationships between people and animals.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Seattle Public Library Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Ingersoll Gender Center. 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 28 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% 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.
79 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. 79 of the 106 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 NATIVE MOVEMENT ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PREVENTION POINT PHILADELPHIA INC ↗
- Who funds NORTHERN ALASKA ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds TIDES CENTER ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
- Who funds SEATTLE PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FAIRBANKS COMMUNITY FOOD BANK SERVICE INC ↗
- Who funds DONORSCHOOSEORG ↗
- Who funds San Mateo County Community Colleges Foundation ↗
- Who funds FARESTART ↗
- Who funds BLUE MOUNTAIN CLINIC INC ↗
- Who funds CENTRE VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE ↗
- Who funds Maris Place ↗
- Who funds FLOURTOWN CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds WHITE CENTER EMERGENCY FOOD ASSOCIATION WHITE CENTER FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds NORTHWESTERN STABLE INC ↗
- Who funds Alternatives to Hunger Bellingham Food Bank ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL JUSTICE FUND NORTHWEST ↗
- Who funds HIGHLINE COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NORTH-MISSOULA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds Commonwealth Youthchoirs Inc ↗
- Who funds Na'ah Illahee Fund ↗
- Who funds INDIAN LAW RESOURCE CENTER ↗
- Who funds PLAY ON PHILLY ↗
- Who funds ATLAS FOUNDATION FOR AUTISM INC ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds BALLARD FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds DAEMION COUNSELING CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds DANNY'S HOUSE ↗
- Who funds NDN COLLECTIVE 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: Puget Sound Energy Foundation · Seattle Foundation · The Philadelphia Foundation · The Norcliffe Foundation · The William Penn Foundation · Whatcom Community Foundation · Rasmuson Foundation · Chuckanut Health Foundation · Henry Dolfinger 2 Trust Uw · The Satterberg Foundation Inc · The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation · Union Benevolent Association
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 Elaine and Vincent Bell 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.
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 Elaine and Vincent Bell Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Elaine and Vincent Bell 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.