Loading…
· Public charity
JAMES W AND CAROLYN O RITCHIE
The purpose of the organization is to distribute substantially all of its income to and for the use of various charities and to help the corporation of the presiding bishop of the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints carry our its purposes and perform its functions of helping provide children with better opportunities and a better…
$117k
Granted FY2024
8
Grants
3
Communities
$23k
Largest
01What you fund
01
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 57% of JAMES W AND CAROLYN O RITCHIE’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.
02FY2024 · 8 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $18k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $80k
$11,850
Median grant
3
States reached
$665k
Total assets
Largest grants
- Monument of the Americas$22,500
- ENGAGE NOW AFRICA$12,561
- LDS PHILANTHROPIES$12,000
- WASATCH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$11,850
- UTAH VALLEY UNIVERSITY$11,500
- ACADEMY FOR CREATING ENTERPRS$10,008
- HELP START FOUNDATION$9,349
- LAUNCHING LEADERS WORLDWIDE$9,000
02The need
03
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 (FY17–17, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11% — the area typically sits at 8%. 100% 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.
91%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$595k · 11 repeat orgs$56k to everyone else
11 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
11
5
Total granted
$595k
$56k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+49%
+84%
Still filing today
45%
80%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
Arts & CultureEducationInternationalPhilanthropyHuman ServicesOther
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
- MOMonument of the Americas4× · 2021–2024 · $108k · revenue +623% · 86% of their budget
- ENENGAGE NOW AFRICA5× · 2018–2024 · $55k · revenue +49%
- HSHELP START FOUNDATION2× · 2023–2024 · $19k · revenue +4805%
Funded once
- TTUACAHNgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue +50%
- LLLAUNCHING LEADERSgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +61%
- ISInterweave Solutiongraduatedone grant, 2021 · $8k · revenue +84%
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.
1
We Care for Humanity
WCHs mission is to foster a compassionate world through acts of kindness with a focus on empowering women and nurturing children for a brighter future by offering education clean water and economic opportunities. The organization thrives…
Arts & Culture
2
World Arise Foundation
—
3
Water for the World
International
4
Humanity United
Philanthropy
5
Women Enabled Enterprises
Women Enabled Enterprises strives to help low income women of color artisans in African countries grow their craft business for self-sufficiency through a virtual, mobile-phone based, retail entrepreneurship skills building program, access…
Human Services
6
Enterprising Women Foundation Inc
The Enterprising Women Foundation was created by a community of women entrepreneurs who have come together to encourage and support philanthropy among women business owners for the purpose of advancing the growth of women's…
Community Improvement
7
Wellness for Humanity Foundation
—
8
Mission Mutual
Backbone services/collective impact: a.the collective impact approach is premised on the belief that no single organization or program can tackle or solve the most complex and broadest scale problems. these call for multiple organizations…
International
9
Platform Heal Inc
To promote clean drinking water in africa
Philanthropy
10
Worldupstart Impacts
We support institutions and governments worldwide to build entrepreneurial ecosystems that drive scientific and technological breakthroughs. we help transform groundbreaking research into real-world solutions that: advance women's health…
Community Improvement
11
Mohuman
mohuman enables people, governments, organizations, and companies to easily and inclusively engage each other in technology and science decision-making.
Science & Tech
12
Hope Worldwide Utah
Hope worldwide utah was created to serve refugee populations around the world. we seek to serve those in acute need and to offer opporunities for volunteers to join us in humanitarian trips.
International
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Engage Now Africa Inc and the most unlike its peers is Help Start Education Foundation. 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
9 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Other$367,674Arts & Culture$133,300International$63,193Philanthropy$40,600Education$35,799Human Services$10,000
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 tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
The Community Foundation of UtahUT13.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: The Community Foundation of Utah · American Endowment Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 organisation JAMES W AND CAROLYN O RITCHIE 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
1get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
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: Monument of the Americas.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
high risk
~3 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 6 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
6 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 7.2× since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 475152099 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 Monument of the Americas, 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
- FlagFinancial stability— Roughly 3 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
- WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 86% 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 James W and Carolyn O Ritchie?
Find your warmest path to James W and Carolyn O Ritchie 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