· Public charity
Foggy Bottom West End Village Inc
To assist residents of the Foggy Bottom/West End neighborhood who desire to remain independent in their homes as they age by facilitating and coordinating a range of supportive services and by sponsoring programs to promote their health and quality of life.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 12 grants below total $667,603 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $709,602 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $41,999 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Kingdom Care Senior Village | $78,961 |
| Capitol Hill Village | $65,842 |
| Brookland Village | $60,551 |
| Georgetown Village | $56,358 |
| Cleveland & Woodley Park Village | $50,842 |
| Dupont Circle Village | $50,842 |
| Northwest Neighbors Village | $50,842 |
| East Rock Creek Village | $50,842 |
| Mount Pleasant Village | $50,841 |
| Waterfront Village | $50,841 |
| Palisades Village | $50,841 |
| Glover Park Village | $50,000 |
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 (FY19–24, $1.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% 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.
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 +53% since the first grant, against +38% for the ones you funded once.
12 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down.
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 FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- CHCAPITOL HILL VILLAGE5× · 2019–2024 · $253k · revenue +53%
- NNNORTHWEST NEIGHBORS VILLAGE5× · 2019–2024 · $243k · revenue +67%
- GVGEORGETOWN VILLAGE INC5× · 2019–2024 · $221k · revenue +88%
Funded once
- SMST MARY'S COURT HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $17k · revenue +38%
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.
San Francisco Village is an innovative membership organization that enables residents to age in their own homes. The Village is dedicated to building community connections for San Francisco residents aged 60 and older, assisted by a robust…
To enable older adults to continue living safely, independently, and with an enhanced quality of life in their own homes and communities as they age by providing access to support services and social programs.
We enable seniors to live in their own homes independently, connect with their community, and age with dignity and grace.
This corporation is a nonprofit public benefit corporation and is not organized for the private gain of any person. It is organized under the Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law for charitable purposes. The specific purpose of this…
Founded in 2011, the mission of Chicago Hyde Park Village (CHPV) is to create a community of ?neighbors helping neighbors? on the south side of Chicago by providing opportunities for social engagement, educational programs, and…
To sustain a robust neighbors-helping-neighbors network that supports older adults who wish to live as independently as possible and be fully engaged in their community as they age.
Adults day care
Build community for seniors to age in place; support nationwide village movement.
Promoting independence of seniors.
The Washington Area Villages Exchange (WAVE) brings together nonprofit villages in the wider Washington DC region to learn and grow by sharing experiences and ideas.
My Glacier Village is a local chapter of the Village to Village Network, a national grassroots organization addressing the current and unfolding challenges of aging in this country. We are providing tangible and valuable services to our…
Helping people age well at home through a blend of supportive volunteer services, engaging in social informational programs, and referrals to recommended service providers.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Georgetown Village Inc and the most unlike its peers is St Mary's Court Housing Development Corp. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
12 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. 12 of the 13 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 CAPITOL HILL VILLAGE ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST NEIGHBORS VILLAGE ↗
- Who funds GEORGETOWN VILLAGE INC ↗
- Who funds Palisades Village ↗
- Who funds EAST ROCK CREEK VILLAGE INC ↗
- Who funds CLEVELAND PARK VILLAGE INC ↗
- Who funds DUPONT CIRCLE VILLAGE ↗
- Who funds WATERFRONT VILLAGE INC ↗
- Who funds MOUNT PLEASANT VILLAGE INC ↗
- Who funds Greater Brookland Intergenerational Village ↗
- Who funds GLOVER PARK VILLAGE INC ↗
- Who funds ST MARY'S COURT HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP ↗
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: Capitol Hill Village · The Washington Home Inc · 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 Foggy Bottom West End Village 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: 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 Foggy Bottom West End Village Inc?
Find your warmest path to Foggy Bottom West End Village Inc 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.