Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

ME Charitable Foundation

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.

$80k
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$35k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202024.

Education$159kPhilanthropy$120kReligion$36kHealth$25kRecreation & Sports$20kInternational$14kEnvironment$2kCrime & Legal$1k
02FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $70k
$15,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
University of the Pacific$35,000
Notre Dame San Jose$20,000
Mercury Drug Foundation$15,000
Save the Children$5,000
Retirement Fund for Religious$3,000
Nature Conservancy$2,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 38% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Voice of the Faithful: $1k → 7%BANK OF THE PHILIPP: $25k → 7%Catholic Community Foundation (DAF): $70k → 8%University of the Pacific: $50k → 12%CENTER FOR ACTIO CAC: $1k → 14%Retirement Fund for Religious: $3k → 14%Henri Nouwen Society: $1k → 11%Save the Children: $5k → 9%St Simon Church: $5k → 16%PARTNERS IN CHRIST: $5k → 11%Future Church: $3k → 17%Nature Conservancy: $2k → 7%NOTRE DAME HIGH SCHOOL SAN JOSE: $40k → 8%University of the Pacific: $35k → 12%Retirement Fund for Religious: $500 → 14%Partners in Christ: $4k → 11%Notre Dame San Jose: $20k → 8%University of the Pacific: $20k → 12%Notre Dame High School San Jose: $10k → 8%University of the Pacific: $4k → 12%Diocese of San Jose: $10k → 8%Silicon Valley Sponsoring: $10k → 8%St Simon Parish: $3k → 8%Mercury: $10k → 8%Law Foundation of SV: $1k → 8%Sacred Heart Community: $1k → 8%BACAR INC: $1k → 8%Sisters of the Holy Names: $10k → 8%Sisters of the Holy Name: $3k → 8%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

Which US states your grants reach

MA
IN
OH
CT
CA
MO
VA
NM
DC

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.

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.

52%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$194k · 5 repeat orgs$180k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +23% since the first grant, against +3% for the ones you funded once.

5 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
16

Total granted

$194k
$155k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+23%
+3%

Still filing today

40%
19%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’20’21’22’23’24
ReligionEducationArts & CultureInternationalOther

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

  • UO
    University of the Pacific
    4× · 2021–2024 · $109k · revenue +23%
  • ND
    NOTRE DAME HIGH SCHOOL SAN JOSE
    2× · 2020–2021 · $50k
  • MD
    Mercury Drug Foundation
    3× · 2020–2024 · $24k

Funded once

  • CC
    Catholic Community Foundation
    one grant, 2023 · $70k
  • BO
    BANK OF THE PHILIPP
    one grant, 2022 · $25k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $10k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
04the grantee network

7 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 7 of the 24 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
5/7
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Catholic Community Foundation (DAF) — $70,000 · OtherCatholic Community Foundation (DAF)NOTRE DAME HIGH SCHOOL SAN JOSE — $50,000 · OtherNOTRE DAME HIGH SCHOOL SAN JOSEBANK OF THE PHILIPP — $25,000 · OtherBANK OF THE PHILIPPMercury Drug Foundation — $23,500 · OtherMercury Drug FoundationNotre Dame San Jose — $20,000 · OtherNotre Dame San JoseIndividual grant recipient — $10,000 · OtherSisters of the Holy Names — $10,000 · OtherMercury — $10,000 · OtherHOLY FAMILY — $10,000 · Other+10 more — $28,500 · Other+10 moreUniversity of the Pacific — $108,500 · EducationUniversity of the PacificSave The Children Federation Inc — $5,000 · InternationalFUTURECHURCH — $3,000 · ReligionVOICE OF THE FAITHFUL INC — $1,000 · ReligionHENRI NOUWEN SOCIETY — $1,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$257,000Education$108,500International$5,000Religion$4,000Arts & Culture$1,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetUniversity of the Pacific — $108,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetPARTNERS IN CHRIST — $8,500 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetSave The Children Federation Inc — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFUTURECHURCH — $3,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHENRI NOUWEN SOCIETY — $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budget
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 University of the Pacific
  • Who funds PARTNERS IN CHRIST
  • Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc
  • Who funds FUTURECHURCH
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY
  • Who funds VOICE OF THE FAITHFUL INC
  • Who funds HENRI NOUWEN SOCIETY

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.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA5.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 ME Charitable Foundation 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 30%
  • Save the Children Federation Inc30% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
typical government reliance, FY2025

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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to ME Charitable Foundation?

Find your warmest path to ME Charitable Foundation 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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 24 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph