Loading…
Loading…
· Public charity
The organization's mission is to spread the good news of jesus christ by giving money to provide the support to children, orphans, and other vulnerable members of society.
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 49% of KATHY VIRTUE KIDS ACROSS AMERICA’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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 9% — the area typically sits at 7%. 81% of your dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. 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 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 98% of KATHY VIRTUE KIDS ACROSS AMERICA’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, 67% of the giving stays in NC; read by stated purpose it is 5% — 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +108% since the first grant, against +14% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 2 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 FY2025, 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.
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.
As a classical christian school, st. stephen's academy aims to provide an academically excellent education in a grace-filled environment that develops christian character and equips students with tools of learning that will last a…
The Organization's mission or most significant activities:The operation of a school to educate students at the preschool, elementary, secondary and home education levels from a Christian worldview. Teach our students to be world leaders of…
Whitefish christian academy is a classical christian school that strives to educate children excellently while honoring god in all things.
Clapham school inspires students with an education founded on a christian worldview, informed by the classical tradition, and approached with diligence and joy.
To educate students in a culture of care, respect, love, and service. each child is known, challenged, understood, and empowered to strive for the highest.
It is the oak hill school mission to build character and integrity in a christian environment for a lifetime of learning and service.
To provide a christian education to children in grades k-8.
Develop academically prepared Christian disciples who embrace Christ's call to transform the world
A small school community committed to kindness and trust, Whitfield inspires a diverse student body to lead lives of curiosity, integrity, and purpose.
Christ school is a boys college preparatory school for both boarding and day students in grades 8-12. open to students worldwide, its mission is to produce educated men of good character, prepared for both scholastic achievement in college…
Southfield school is a private, independent, coeducational day school for students in preschool through grade eight. the mission of southfield school is to develop a lifelong love of learning.
Brookfield christian school offers a christ-centered education that prepares students to learn, to lead, and to serve faithfully in god's world.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is St Timothy's School and the most unlike its peers is Young Life. 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: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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.
Every dot is one organisation KATHY VIRTUE KIDS ACROSS AMERICA 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: THE SOUTHERN PINES LAND & HOUSING TRUST.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
~2 months of operating runway; revenue contracted over 4 filed years.
4 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
US 501(c)(3); EIN 320282058 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 THE SOUTHERN PINES LAND & HOUSING TRUST, 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 Kathy Virtue Kids Across America 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.