· Private foundation
Live Foundation Inc
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k7 grants · $28k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $39k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NW ALLIANCE FOR BLIND ATHLETES | $15,000 |
| IDAHO STATE UNIV FOUNDATION | $14,000 |
| ADAPTIVE CYCLING OF SOUTHERN IDAHO | $10,000 |
| NEW DAY | $7,000 |
| HODIA IDAHO DIABETES YOUTH PROGRAM | $6,000 |
| LIVING INDEPENDENCE NETWORK CORP | $5,000 |
| FAMILY SERVICE ALLIANCE | $5,000 |
| TOYS FOR TOTS | $3,000 |
| ENVISION SIGHT | $1,328 |
| Individual grant recipient | $500 |
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 (FY17–24, $85k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 89% 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 46% of Live Foundation Inc’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, 90% of the giving stays in ID; read by stated purpose it is 46% — 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.
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 +39% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
16 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k 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
- ISIdaho State University Foundation Inc7× · 2017–2024 · $80k · revenue +129%
- ESENVISION SIGHT INC4× · 2017–2024 · $49k · revenue +62%
- NANORTHWEST ASSOCIATION FOR BLIND ATHLETES5× · 2017–2021 · $40k · revenue +332%
Funded once
- NANORTHWEST ASSOC FOR BLIND ATHLETESone grant, 2022 · $16k
- NANW ASSOC FOR BLIND ATHLETESone grant, 2023 · $15k
- EENVISIONone grant, 2021 · $12k
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.
The organization protects, promotes and advances the legal and human rights of individuals with disabilities, through quality legal, individual, and system advocacy.
To promote, ensure & maintain excellent & comprehensive educational opportunities for the children and youth served by Idaho Educational Services for the Deaf and Blind from birth to 26 years of age across the state of Idaho.
To make known the gifts of people with development disabilities, revealed through mutually transforming relationships, to foster an environment in community that responds to the changing needs of members while being faithful to the core…
Idaho legal aid services inc is a statewide nonprofit law firm dedicated to providing equal access for low-income people through quality advocacy and education
To provide affordable inclusive physical and recreational activities that build health and confidence.
Nami idaho works to improve the quality of life for all those affected by mental illness through support, education, advocacy and research.
Assist individuals with disabilities
Provide Transportation Services
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Special Olympics Idaho Inc and the most unlike its peers is Midway Elementary School. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
14 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. 14 of the 38 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 Idaho State University Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds ENVISION SIGHT INC ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST ASSOCIATION FOR BLIND ATHLETES ↗
- Who funds Idaho Diabetes Youth Program ↗
- Who funds FAMILY SERVICES ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds RISING STARS THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds LIVING INDEPENDENCE NETWORK COPORATION ↗
- Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS IDAHO INC ↗
- Who funds MIDWAY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds Aquability Inc ↗
- Who funds WELLNESS TREE COMMUNITY CLINIC ↗
- Who funds LIONS INTERNATIONAL BOISE BENCH ↗
- Who funds IDAHO FALLS RESCUE MISSION INC ↗
- Who funds SPECIALIZED NEEDS RECREATION INC ↗
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: Idaho Community Foundation Inc · Lamb Weston Charitable Foundation · Laura Moore Cunningham Foundation Inc · St Luke's Health System Ltd · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Live Foundation 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 Live Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Live Foundation 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.