How much did Grapevine giving foundation grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 50% of Grapevine giving foundation’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.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2022

indigenous peoplesmeet physicalspiritual childrencare developdevelop personalpersonal relationshipsrelationships contribute

2023

opencatsplandaytimeilinowlike

2024

patientsafter-schoolhonordowncurriculumsanctuarylighthouse

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 537 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k341 grants · $2.4M
$10k–50k193 grants · $2.7M
$50k–250k3 grants · $217k

$8,300

Median grant

States reached

$4.1M

Total assets

Largest grants

Richmond Community ToolBank$100,000
Spur Local Inc$59,919
Heritage Classic Foundation$56,895
Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs Inc$36,999
Chicago Foundation for Women$36,296
Sleep in Heavenly Peace Inc$36,293
Myriad USA Inc$33,500
G Irl$32,295
Women in Non Traditional Employment Roles$25,000
New Village Charter School Inc$25,000
The Flow$25,000
Ready to Launch$25,000
Friends of GALA$25,000
Common Counsel Foundation$23,808
Community Homeless Outreach and Support Inc$23,719

02The need

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 (FY22–24, $2.7M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12% — the area typically sits at 10%. 74% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — 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.

6%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$991k · 30 repeat orgs$16M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +151% since the first grant, against +85% for the ones you funded once.

30 repeat relationships — 26 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 511 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

582

Total granted

$991k

$11M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+151%

+85%

Still filing today

90%

85%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 8% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4.9M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesHealthEducationYouth DevelopmentArts & CultureHousing & ShelterOther

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

EQUITY AND TRANSFORMATION
2× · 2022–2023 · $97k · revenue +66%
CF
Chicago Foundation for Women
3× · 2022–2024 · $94k · revenue +60%
HC
Heritage Classic Foundation
3× · 2022–2024 · $88k · revenue +50%

Funded once

SA
SEE ATTACHED
one grant, 2022 · $2.7M
WE
WOMEN ENGAGED
one grant, 2022 · $130k · revenue +20%
BA
BLACKROOTS ALLIANCEgraduated
one grant, 2022 · $125k · revenue +109%

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.

Grace Kitchen

Grace Kitchen is a nonprofit that offers hope and opportunity for lasting change to women survivors of trafficking, addiction, homelessness and poverty. We do this by teaching job and life skills that enable them to gain sustainable…

Employment

Almost Home

Almost Home empowers young moms to become self-sufficient and create a better future for themselves and their children.

—

Woman Inc

W.o.m.a.n., inc. supports survivors ofdomestic violence and their loved ones along their healing journeys, bridgingvalue-rich networks designed to address intersections of violence.

Health

Fresh Start Inc

Fresh start is a transitional shelter that empowers women experiencing homelessness to change their lives by recognizing and using their strenghts to overcome barriers to self-sufficiency.

—

Crossroads for Women Inc

Crossroads provides gender-responsive addiction and behavioral health treatment services in a safe and respectful environment so individuals and families can lead healthy lives.

Health

Opening Doors for Women in Need

Providing temporary transitional reentry resources to women that were recently released from prison jail or substance abuse programs. Mission is to reduce the rate of recidivism homelessness and unemployment which are bearers contributing…

Human Services

Safe Embrace

Safe Embrace is committed to ending the cycle of domestic and sexual violence with innovative prevention and intervention services. We help victims of domestic abuse, sexual assault, and human trafficking become survivors by providing…

Health

Chances & Changes Inc

To operate residential and non-residential programs for victims of domestic violence.

—

Wayfinder Family Services

Wayfinder's mission is to ensure that children, youth and adults facing challenges always have a place to turn.

Human Services

Peaceful Hugs

Assist single parents, at-risk youth, and people in need. We do this by providing opportunities in employment, education, housing, and other resources to support personal and professional growth.

Human Services

Center for Domestic Peace

Center for Domestic Peace mobilizes individuals and communities to transform our world so domestic violence no longer exists, creating greater safety, justice, and equality.

Human Services

Su Casa - Ending Domestic Violence

To provide shelter, food and healing services for victims of domestic violence and their children. this is done through 24-hour crisis hotline, emergency shelter, transitional shelter, community outreach and education, and walk-in…

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cheyenne River Youth Project Inc and the most unlike its peers is Point Park University. 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.

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 14 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 10% of your grantees by number, and just 11% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 1.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

1.0%11/1,122

the rest of the field

11%

206,153/1,818,443

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.

05the grantee network

983 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

497

Early backer (in before they grew)

966/983

Grantees still filing

806/983

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$9,724,685Human Services$2,895,918Health$1,023,317Philanthropy$832,031Youth Development$735,016Education$703,344Arts & Culture$654,738

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.

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 loosely connected circle, clustered around a few shared anchors.

The Richard M Schulze Family FoundationMN97.3× affinity282 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Richard M Schulze Family Foundation · Pinellas Community Foundation · Rogers Family Foundation · The Saab Family Foundation · Richard L and Diane M Block Foundation · Juneau Community Foundation · Newman's Own Foundation · Cummings Foundation Grants Inc (Fka Oneworld Boston Inc) · Vermont Childrens Trust Foundation · Stand Together Foundation · Clif Family Foundation · We Share A Common Thread 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 organisation Grapevine giving 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

23get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

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: REPARATION EDUCATION PROJECT.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~11 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 3 filed years.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

3 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 2.3× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 881782233 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on REPARATION EDUCATION PROJECT, 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

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 11 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 96% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

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.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

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

How do I get to Grapevine giving foundation?

Find your warmest path to Grapevine giving foundation 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.

More from the funding graph

The regranting layer

51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary

The DAF merry-go-round

$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds

Strange bedfellows

the named clusters of US funding

The camps

funders cluster by geography, not ideology

By state

where grant money is based, and what stays home

State money flows

the interactive map of money crossing state lines