· Public charity
Mission Projects Fellowship Inc
Funding of equipment for missionaries.
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.
The 6 grants below total $58,011 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $99,445 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $41,434 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k3 grants · $17k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $41k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SOURCE OF LIGHT MINISTRIES | $15,000 |
| CHRISTIAN AID MISSION | $13,979 |
| REACHING AFRICA'S UNREACHED | $12,472 |
| THUNDERZOLL INC | $6,000 |
| PAK7 | $5,390 |
| GOSPELINK | $5,170 |
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, $131k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 53% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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
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.
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 +48% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
20 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 18 since wound down; 4 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, 34% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $38k 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
- MEMISSION EURASIA4× · 2017–2022 · $58k · revenue +180%
- OWONE WAY MINISTRIES3× · 2019–2022 · $40k · revenue +48%
- CFCHARIOTS FOR HOPE INC3× · 2017–2022 · $34k · revenue +82%
Funded once
- FOFIELDS OF ABUNDANCE MISSIONone grant, 2023 · $15k · revenue -4%
- RFREFUGE FOR THE POORone grant, 2021 · $15k · revenue +22%
- BHBOLD HOPE INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $14k · revenue +80%
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.
To spread the gospel of jesus christ through crusades
Ministry
Religious
Childrens Home and Ministry in India
Heart Bridge International exists to equip and empower Christians around the world to fulfill the Great Commission. The organization provides free ministry training, discipleship resources, and practical coaching to under-resourced…
Our mission is to carry out the commands of our Lord Jesus Christ to take the Good News of the gospel to the whole world teaching people to obey everything He commanded. We work among mostly low-literacy populations so we do this by…
To teach the bible to pastors and church leaders in africa and asia, while funding food for orphaned and abandonded children
Literature for africa
assisting orphans and missionary in need
Christian support for third world countr
To propagate the gospel of jesus christ; to examine candidates and appoint missionaries. to endorse missionary programs according to standards set forth in the new testament, to establish churches, church schools & mission societies in…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mission Eurasia and the most unlike its peers is Thunderzoll Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 27 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
30 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. 30 of the 45 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 MISSION EURASIA ↗
- Who funds The Orphanetwork ↗
- Who funds ONE WAY MINISTRIES ↗
- Who funds CHRISTIAN MISSION FOR THE DEAF ↗
- Who funds CHARIOTS FOR HOPE INC ↗
- Who funds The Rosser Foundation dba International Cooperating Ministries ↗
- Who funds CHRISTIAN WORLD OUTREACH ↗
- Who funds CHILD EVANGELISM FELLOWSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds SAT-7 NORTH AMERICA ↗
- Who funds THE MAILBOX CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds THUNDERZOLL INC ↗
- Who funds Rishama International ↗
- Who funds ANANIAS HOUSE ↗
- Who funds CLC Ministries International ↗
- Who funds FIELDS OF ABUNDANCE MISSION ↗
- Who funds REFUGE FOR THE POOR ↗
- Who funds BOLD HOPE INC ↗
- Who funds PRIORITY ONE INDIA USA ↗
- Who funds REACHING AFRICA'S UNREACHED ↗
- Who funds LIVING HOPE INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds AFRICAN CHILDREN'S MISSION INC ↗
- Who funds CENTRO SHALOM TIJUANA INC ↗
- Who funds LIVE EAR MINISTRES ↗
- Who funds HOPE'S PROMISE INC ↗
- Who funds MCM INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds El Alfarero USA ↗
- Who funds Marine Reach - Family Care Centre ↗
- Who funds Horizons International ↗
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: The Bolick Foundation · Tyndale House Ministries · Christian Community Foundation Inc · The Maclellan Foundation Inc · From His Hand Foundation · Servant Foundation · Gordon Christian Trust · International Generosity Foundation Trust · Eden Bridge Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · The Signatry Charitable Trust · The US Charitable Gift Trust
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 Mission Projects Fellowship 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 Mission Projects Fellowship Inc?
Find your warmest path to Mission Projects Fellowship 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.