Skip to content

· Private foundation

Evergreen Philanthropic 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.

$13k
Granted FY2024still arriving
10
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Human Services$122kHealth$19kAnimals$17kEnvironment$8kEducation$3kReligion$2kPublic Benefit$500Other$0
02FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,500
Median grant
4
States reached
$217k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RANCHO RELAXO$3,000
DAWN$1,500
ARCHDIOSES OF NEWARK ST JOSEPHS$1,500
FORGOTTEN NOW FAMILY RESCUE$1,500
ASSOCIATED HUMANE SOCIEITIES$1,500
206 SOUTH$1,000
THE VILLAGE$1,000
NJ SHORE ANIMAL SHELTER$1,000
IRONWOOD PIG SANCTUARY$500
POINT PAWS$500
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY17–22, $117k) 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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%STRENGTHEN OUR SISTERS: $45k → 12%STRENGTHEN OUR SISTERS: $23k → 12%STRENGTHEN OUR SISTERS: $20k → 12%STRENGTHEN OUR SISTERS: $15k → 12%STRENGTHEN OUR SISTERS: $10k → 12%STRENGTHEN OUR SISTERS: $5k → 12%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

75%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$128k · 4 repeat orgs$42k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +66% since the first grant, against +4% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
5

Total granted

$128k
$29k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+66%
+4%

Still filing today

50%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’24
AnimalsHuman ServicesPublic BenefitOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • SO
    STRENGTHEN OUR SISTERS INC
    6× · 2017–2022 · $117k · revenue +66%
  • JS
    JERSEY SHORE ANIMAL CENTER INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $6k · revenue +15%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PRE
    3× · 2018–2021 · $3k

Funded once

  • IF
    INDEPENDENCE FUNDORG
    one grant, 2020 · $16k
  • L5
    LAUNCH 5 HUDSON RIVER
    one grant, 2022 · $8k
  • CH
    COLLIER HIGH SCHOOL
    one grant, 2021 · $3k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Idaho Animal Rescue Network

Idaho Animal Rescue Network is a 501(c)(3) non-profit based in Idaho that works in Idaho and Eastern Washington to educate, advocate, and network with other rescues and law enforcement in Idaho regarding animal cruelty and neglect. We are…

Animals
2
Donna's Love Pet Rescue
Animals
3
Pound Pets Inc

Animal Rescue - finding homes for abandoned animals in Granite City, spaying and neutering stray animals and feral cats

Animals
4
Safe Haven Inc
Animals
5
Animal Sanctuary Society Inc

ANIMAL RESCUE and adoption of animals

Animals
6
Raskels Rescue
Animals
7
Anas Safe Haven Rescue Inc

Animal Welfare

Animals
8
Society for Animal Rescue and Adoption

Operate true "no-kill" animal sanctuary which provides rehabilitation to abused or abandoned domestic and factory farm animals on its 120 acre preserve.

Animals
9
Pinehaven Farm a Sanctuary Inc

Pinehaven Farm is a non-profit sanctuary dedicated to dogs, cats, horses and other animals in need of a permanent home and the prevention of future overpopulation through education programs on spraying and neutering.

Animals
10
Happy Hen Animal Sanctuary
Animals
11
Fur Animal Rescue

Animal rescue organization dedicated to finding homes for animals at the animal shelter. we also provde vet care foster homes, and assistance with homing for special needs animals.

Animals
12
Abandoned Animal Rescue

AAR is an all volunteer organization that works towards ending pet overpopulation that results in the euthanasia of unwanted cats and dogs by providing a rescue and adoption center by emphasizing the importance of spaying and neutering and…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rancho Relaxo Inc; the most unlike its peers is Associated Humane Societies 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 grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 19 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

STRENGTHEN OUR SISTERS INC: $117,000 · Human ServicesSTRENGTHEN OUR SISTERS INC+1 more: $1,500 · Human ServicesINDEPENDENCE FUNDORG: $16,000 · OtherINDEPENDENCE FUNDORGLAUNCH 5 HUDSON RIVER: $7,500 · OtherLAUNCH 5 HUDSON RIVERAMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PRE: $2,500 · OtherAMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR S…COLLIER HIGH SCHOOL: $2,500 · OtherCOLLIER HIGH SCHOOLHAPPY HEART HAPPY HOME: $2,500 · OtherHAPPY HEART HAPPY HOMEMISFIT ANGEL NETWORK INC: $2,000 · OtherARCHDIOSES OF NEWARK ST JOSEPHS: $1,500 · Other+4 more: $3,500 · Other+4 moreJERSEY SHORE ANIMAL CENTER INC: $6,000 · AnimalsRANCHO RELAXO INC: $3,000 · AnimalsASSOCIATED HUMANE SOCIETIES INC: $1,500 · AnimalsForgotten Now Family Rescue Co: $1,500 · AnimalsTHE MARY C SCHANZ FOUNDATION: $500 · AnimalsDISABLED VETERANS NATIONAL FOUNDATION: $500 · Public Benefit
Human Services$118,500Other$38,000Animals$12,500Public Benefit$500

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSTRENGTHEN OUR SISTERS INC: $117,000 over 6y, 14% of budgetJERSEY SHORE ANIMAL CENTER INC: $6,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetRANCHO RELAXO INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetASSOCIATED HUMANE SOCIETIES INC: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetForgotten Now Family Rescue Co: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDOMESTIC ABUSE WOMEN'S NETWORK: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE MARY C SCHANZ FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDISABLED VETERANS NATIONAL FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds STRENGTHEN OUR SISTERS INC ↗
  • Who funds JERSEY SHORE ANIMAL CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds RANCHO RELAXO INC ↗
  • Who funds ASSOCIATED HUMANE SOCIETIES INC ↗
  • Who funds Forgotten Now Family Rescue Co ↗
  • Who funds DOMESTIC ABUSE WOMEN'S NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds THE MARY C SCHANZ FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds DISABLED VETERANS NATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Chubb Charitable FoundationPA14.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Chubb Charitable Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Columbia Bank Foundation · Network for Good · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Evergreen Philanthropic Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Evergreen Philanthropic Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    5get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Evergreen Philanthropic Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Evergreen Philanthropic 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 19 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Evergreen Philanthropic’s filings →

    More from the funding graph