Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Public charity

Esperanza Charitable Fund

Provide support and benefits to the church of jesus christ of latter day saints by providing grants for assistance.

$1.7M
Granted FY2024still arriving
14
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$932k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.

Religion$7.4MCivil Rights$675kArts & Culture$675kInternational$515kEducation$475kHousing & Shelter$215kPhilanthropy$185kHuman Services$182kOther$0
02FY2024 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k7 grants · $150k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $580k
  • $250k+1 grant · $932k
$50,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$44M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LDS$932,000
NATIONAL CENTER ON SEXUAL EXPLOITATION$220,000
BECKETT FUND FOR RELIGIOUS LIBERTY$150,000
CARE FOR LIFE CO CINDY PACKARD$60,000
VOTERS CHOICE ARIZONA$50,000
ACADEMY FOR CREATING ENTERPRISE - CALLED2SERVE FOUNDATION$50,000
MAKE ELECTIONS FAIR$50,000
HOUSE OF REFUGE$35,000
GOLD CANYON HEART AND HOME NOW KNOW AS NEW FREEDOM PROJECT$30,000
MENTOR INTERNATIONAL$30,000
INSTITUTE FOR FAMILY STUDIES$20,000
UNITED FOOD BANK$15,000
POSITIVE PATHS$10,000
TO SEEK LIFE$10,000
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 (FY23–24, $60k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, 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%GOLD CANYON HEART AND HOME NOW KNOW AS NEW FREEDOM PROJECT: $30k → 11%GOLD CANYON HEART AND HOME NOW KNOW AS NEW FREEDOM PROJECT: $30k → 11%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$10M · 18 repeat orgs$394k to everyone else

18 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
7

Total granted

$10M
$274k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+55%
+89%

Still filing today

89%
86%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $120k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationPhilanthropyHousing & ShelterArts & CultureReligionHuman ServicesOther

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

  • TB
    The Becket Fund
    8× · 2017–2024 · $675k · revenue +81%
  • NC
    NATIONAL CENTER ON SEXUAL EXPLOITATION
    5× · 2020–2024 · $553k · revenue +6%
  • CF
    Care for Life Inc
    8× · 2017–2024 · $455k · revenue +106%

Funded once

  • TL
    THE LEGACY FILMS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2018 · $82k · revenue +89% · 27% of their budget
  • TL
    THE LIFT FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $75k · revenue +556%
  • AW
    ARIZONA WOMENS HISTORY ALLIANCE INC
    one grant, 2022 · $70k

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
Arizona Healthiest State Foundation
—
2
The Fine Family Foundation
Philanthropy
3
The Family Foundation
Philanthropy
4
The International Foundation
—
5
Arizona Freedom Foundation

The Foundation's mission is to foster independent journalism and provide the general public with access to news, research and information not covered by traditional corporate media outlets. To that end, the Foundation operates AZ Free News…

—
6
Leaving Legacies Foundation
Philanthropy
7
Dream Foundation Arizona
Employment
8
Foundational Questions Institute
Philanthropy
9
Federation for American Immigration Reform

The federation for american immigration reform's (fair) mission is to educate the public about the economic, sociological, environmental, demographic and other effects of mass immigration to the united states.

International
10
Arizona Latin-American Medical Association
Unclassified
11
Four Angels Foundation
Philanthropy
12
World Family Foundation
Philanthropy

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Save the Family Foundation of Arizona and the most unlike its peers is T Golden 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyArizona Policy and Civic En…Youth Sports ProgramsInternational Child & Commu…Family Support and Housing …Family Philanthropic Founda…Charter and Private Schools
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number25%5%<5yr16%9%5–10yr19%23%10–20yr16%41%20–35yr12%18%35–55yr13%5%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value25%0%<5yr16%3%5–10yr19%17%10–20yr16%45%20–35yr12%16%35–55yr13%17%55yr+

The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 15% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
3%1/29
the rest of the field
15%
5,441/36,155

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.

04the grantee network

27 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. 27 of the 29 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
12
Early backer (in before they grew)
26/27
Grantees still filing
20/27
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS — $7,314,340 · OtherCHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS+11 more — $477,000 · Other+11 moreThe Becket Fund — $675,000 · Social ScienceCare for Life Inc — $455,000 · PhilanthropyT GOLDEN FOUNDATION — $100,000 · PhilanthropyTHE LIFT FOUNDATION — $75,000 · Philanthropy+1 more — $9,500 · PhilanthropyNATIONAL CENTER ON SEXUAL EXPLOITATION — $552,667 · Arts & CultureMETROPOLITAN YOUTH SYMPHONY — $22,500 · Arts & CultureAMERICAN LEADERSHIP ACADEMY — $215,000 · EducationTHE INSTITUTE FOR FAMILY STUDIES — $160,000 · EducationARIZONA WOMENS HISTORY ALLIANCE INC — $70,000 · EducationARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION FOR A NEW AMERICAN UNIVERSITY — $20,000 · Education+2 more — $12,500 · EducationHOUSE OF REFUGE INC — $215,000 · Housing & ShelterSAVE THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF ARIZONA — $121,645 · Housing & ShelterAcademy for Creating Enterprise — $160,000 · InternationalMentors International — $60,000 · International
Other$7,791,340Social Science$675,000Philanthropy$639,500Arts & Culture$575,167Education$477,500Housing & Shelter$336,645International$220,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetThe Becket Fund — $675,000 over 8y, 1.1% of budgetNATIONAL CENTER ON SEXUAL EXPLOITATION — $552,667 over 5y, 4.0% of budgetCare for Life Inc — $455,000 over 8y, 17% of budgetHOUSE OF REFUGE INC — $215,000 over 7y, 1.5% of budgetAMERICAN LEADERSHIP ACADEMY — $215,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetAcademy for Creating Enterprise — $160,000 over 5y, 3.7% of budgetTHE INSTITUTE FOR FAMILY STUDIES — $160,000 over 8y, 3.7% of budgetSAVE THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF ARIZONA — $121,645 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetUnited Food Bank — $120,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetT GOLDEN FOUNDATION — $100,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetTHE LEGACY FILMS FOUNDATION — $82,000 over 1y, 27% of budgetMentors International — $60,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetNEW FREEDOM PROJECT — $60,000 over 2y, 8.3% of budgetVOTER CHOICE ARIZONA — $50,000 over 1y, 29% of budgetMAKE ELECTIONS FAIR INC — $50,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR THE FAMILY — $40,000 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetMETROPOLITAN YOUTH SYMPHONY — $22,500 over 3y, 4.4% of budgetARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION FOR A NEW AMERICAN UNIVERSITY — $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR APOLOGETIC INFORMATION AND RESEARCH — $20,000 over 4y, 6.4% of budgetTHE WELCOME TO AMERICA PROJECT — $15,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetARIZONA TRAIL ASSOCIATION — $15,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetTo Seek Life — $10,000 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetPOSITIVE PATHS — $10,000 over 1y, 4.6% of budgetOK Foundation — $9,500 over 1y, 0.7% 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.

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.

Arizona Community Fou…The Shedry Dar Founda…Beesley Family Founda…University ImpactThe Community Foundat…American Express Foun…American Endowment Fo…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…The Blackbaud Giving …American Online Givin…The Bank of America C…
Arizona Community FoundationAZ19.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Arizona Community Foundation · The Shedry Dar Foundation · Beesley Family Foundation · University Impact · The Community Foundation of Utah · American Express Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Esperanza Charitable 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–25

    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 29 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home