· Private foundation
Massey Family Charitable Foundation Inc
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CHILDREN INTERNATIONAL | $308 |
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 (FY17–17, $9k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% 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 22% of Massey Family Charitable 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, 99% of the giving stays in AR; read by stated purpose it is 79% — 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 +45% since the first grant, against +40% for the ones you funded once.
12 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 11 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 FY2024, 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.
Backed again, and grew
- RFRAZORBACK FOUNDATION INC2× · 2017–2021 · $1.4M · revenue +67%
- AOATHLETES OF PROMISE FOUNDATION2× · 2018–2019 · $350k · revenue +17% · 66% of their budget
- MOMUSEUM OF DISCOVERY2× · 2018–2020 · $138k · revenue +45%
Funded once
- UUAMSone grant, 2021 · $497k
- ECEPISCOPAL COLLEGIATE SCHOOL ANNUAL FUNDone grant, 2021 · $343k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2017 · $250k
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 selection, recognition, and acknowledgement of those who throughout outstanding achievement in any form of sport have brought honor and prestige to Arkansas
The university of arkansas at pine bluff's alumni scholarship endowment fund's mission was created to provide scholarships to the university to assist with providing education and training which meet the needs of a culturally diverse…
To honor the legacy of Arkansas sports history
The foundation's mission is to broaden and enhance educational and employment opportunities for persons with visual impairments.
Provide african american awareness on arkansans who have made important contributions to society
The primary purpose of the University of Arkansas Hope - Texarkana Foundation is to advance higher education by securing private financial support for all units and activities of the University of Arkansas Hope Texarkana.
The Academies of Central Arkansas Foundation advances career-connected learning by bridging education, business, and community to cultivate future leaders, strengthen the local workforce, and prepare every learner for college, career, and…
To assist in developing and increasing programs and facilities of north arkansas college.
Advocate for educational professionals and unite our members and the state to fulfill the promise of public education to prepare every student to succeed in a diverse and interdependent world.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Economics Arkansas Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Athletes of Promise Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
17 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. 17 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 RAZORBACK FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ATHLETES OF PROMISE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MUSEUM OF DISCOVERY ↗
- Who funds ARKANSAS BAPTIST COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds CATHEDRAL ARTS PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ANIMAL VILLAGE INC ↗
- Who funds ARKANSAS HUNGER RELIEF ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds Little Rock School District Athletic Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds HUMANE SOCIETY OF NW MONTANA ↗
- Who funds Philander Smith College ↗
- Who funds ECONOMICS ARKANSAS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF RECOVERY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds IMMERSE ARKANSAS ↗
- Who funds CONWAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ARKANSAS AVIATION HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Children International ↗
- Who funds LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN CITIZENS ↗
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: Arkansas Community Foundation Inc · Arvest Foundation · Riggs Benevolent Fund · Delta Dental Plan of Arkansas Inc · Network for Good · The Bank of America Charitable 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 Massey Family Charitable 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.