Loading…
Loading…
· Private foundation
This foundation does not accept unsolicited requests — it funds preselected organizations.
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 51% of JAMES M DOSS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION TRUST’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 · FY2025
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY21–25, $112k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9% — the area typically sits at 10%. 2% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
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.
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 5% of JAMES M DOSS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION TRUST’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 91% of the giving stays in FL; read by stated purpose it is 85% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
22 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 60% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $189k 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.
To create and foster economic opportunities in collaboration with community and regional partners to diversify, grow and sustain our economy while enhancing our unique natural and cultural environment.
The florida center supports the healthy development of young children, specializing in those with delays, disabilities or mental health challenges. our mission- "to help build and foster strong families and expand the potential of young…
As lead agency for the sarasota/manatee continuum of care, suncoast partnership collaborates with providers of services and housing for those who are homeless and those at imminent risk of homelessness. we receive and distribute grants,…
The organization's mission is to identify and invest in workforce development solutions to meet the needs of manatee and sarasota counties.
Forty carrots family center's mission is to nurture healthy child and family development through research-based, relationship-centered education and mental health services.
Sarasota memorial healthcare foundation, inc. is an independent fundraising organization working with sarasota memorial health care system and others to ensure the highest quality healthcare is accessible and meets the needs of our…
Our mission is to encourage, honor and support the human-animal bond in the suncoastregion of florida. our vision is to celebrate a community whose pets are safe andloved. suncoast humane society provides sheltering, prevention and…
To enrich lives, captivate emotions and strengthen the community through the art of dance.
Promote and advocate science, conservation, and environmental issues in sarasota and manatee county for maintaining and improving quality of life through education, public outreach, demonstration, information gathering and analysis, and…
Private united methodist affiliated college that is committed to educational excellence.
To improve public safety in the city of sarasota, florida, by providing resources and support to the sarasota city police department that are not readily available through other means.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Suncoast Charities for Children Inc and the most unlike its peers is Seminole Boosters Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 32 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 26% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
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: The Community Foundation of Sarasota Co · Gulf Coast Community Foundation Inc · Msc Foundation Inc · Janice S Kelly Memorial Foundation · Annette J Hagens Memorial Foundation · The Tillie Jennie & Harold Schwartz · Roberta Leventhal Sudakoff Foundation Inc · Joan Armour Mendell Foundation Inc · The Louis and Gloria Flanzer · Tarr Charitable Family Foundation Inc · Charles & Margery Barancik Foundation Inc · Manatee Community 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.
Every dot is one organisation JAMES M DOSS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION TRUST 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, a single department, or state — 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: FACE AUTISM.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Limited financial data in public filings.
8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 2.1× since.
US 501(c)(3); EIN 261141761 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 FACE AUTISM, 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 James M Doss Charitable Foundation Trust 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.