Loading…
Loading…
· Public charity
Increase the capacity of philantropy and community organization to ensure the resilience of the most vulnerable sectors.
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 46% of FILANTROPIA PUERTO RICO INC’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2022
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
4 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2022, 0 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (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 FY2022, 29% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.1M 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.
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.
Promote the right to housing and to the city, collective land tenure, climate justice and participatory practices, with emphasis on marginalized communities and self-built settlements in Puerto Rico and abroad, and contribute to develop…
Medical asst to under develop areas
Educate and research anti-racist and decolonizing work inside and outside of Puerto Rico
To teach entrepreneurship to people interested in starting businesses in Puerto Rico with the mission of improving local and country economy thru small businesses.
Promote nature and cultural tourism which in turn generates forms of sustainable development more jobs and economic benefits for the Region. Establish and strengthen regional alliances in Eastern-Central Regions of Puerto Rico for the…
Development activities, projects of housing and socioeconomic development to assist low and moderate income comunities in puerto rico.
Civic organization created to to empower the island's local governments in a nonpartisan effort to improve the quality of life of the Puerto Rican people
It was created to encourage the overcoming of poverty through the provision of integrated services with technical and educational tools that promote economic and social self-sufficiency of individuals, family and communities of low income…
The University of Puerto Rico Foundation is a non-partisan non-profit organization that facilitates philanthrophic contributions and support to benefit the University of Puerto Rico systems campuses students and faculty.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Haser Inc and the most unlike its peers is Para La Naturaleza Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
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
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.
Open a dossier: Tides Center · Hispanic Federation Inc · Center for Popular Democracy Inc · Puerto Rico Community Foundation Inc · Globalgiving Foundation Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Iara Lee and George Gund III Foundation · Grassroots International Inc · New Venture Fund · Center for a New Economy Inc · Fundacion Puertorriquea de Las · Oxfam-America 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.
Every dot is one organisation FILANTROPIA PUERTO RICO INC 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. 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.
Through Plinth
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: COMITE PRO DESARROLLO SOCIAL Y CULTURAL.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
~3 months of operating runway; revenue held over 4 filed years.
4 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
US 501(c)(3); EIN 660608512 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on COMITE PRO DESARROLLO SOCIAL Y CULTURAL, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
Find your warmest path to Filantropia Puerto Rico Inc through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.