· Private foundation
Mn Osborne Charitable Foundation Trust
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 FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k2 grants · $46k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $208k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Timothy V Dixon Ministry Inc | $208,000 |
| New Creation Ministries | $30,000 |
| Preparing the Way Ministries | $16,000 |
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 (FY19–21, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 36% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
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 +33% since the first grant, against +22% for the ones you funded once.
15 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 13 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, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k 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
JUDICIAL WATCH INC4× · 2018–2021 · $18k · revenue +78%- ACAMERICAN CENTER FOR LAW AND JUSTICE INC4× · 2018–2021 · $17k · revenue +33%
- TPTURNING POINT USA INC2× · 2020–2021 · $10k · revenue +190%
Funded once
- ACABG Charitable Trustone grant, 2022 · $3.4M · 100% of their budget
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $55k
- FOFRIENDS OF TUNISIAone grant, 2022 · $25k
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.
Ptm worldwide publishes christianity without the religion magazine and plain truth magazine. ptm further serves with daily radio programs, blogs, bible surveys and many other free inspirational resources on its website, www.ptm.org
The open technology fund aims to advance internet freedom globally by supporting the research, development, implementation, and maintenance of technologies that provide secure and uncensored access to the internet.
The center is specifically dedicated to the ideal that religious freedom and freedom of speech are inalienable, god given rights. the center's purpose is to educate, promulgate, conciliate and where necessary, litigate, to ensure that…
Present the gospel
Crossway is a not-for-profit Christian publishing ministry of Good News Publishers that exists to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ through publishing and other means, in order, by God's grace: to bring people to Christ as their Lord and…
We proclaim the absolute truth and authority of the bible with boldness. we relate the relevance of a literal genesis to the church and world today with creativity. we obey god's call to deliver the message of the gospel, individually and…
Christianity Today is a global community inspired by evangelical conviction to advance the stories and ideas of the kingdom of God. Our mission is to elevate the storytellers and sages of the global church.
Witness helps people use video and technology to protect and defend human rights. witness is working towards a world where the communities we center, serve, and support can safely and effectively use video and technology to end human…
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Heritage Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Abg Charitable Trust. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 20 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 69% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 15% 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.
22 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. 22 of the 55 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 ABG Charitable Trust ↗
- Who funds SOW RICHLY ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds JUDICIAL WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CENTER FOR LAW AND JUSTICE INC ↗
- Who funds DUTCH SHEETS MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds GOOD NEWS COMMUNICATIONS INC ↗
- Who funds IN HIS IMAGE INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE OUACHITA TRAIL INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FAMILY ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds TURNING POINT USA INC ↗
- Who funds THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CONCERNED WOMEN FOR AMERICA ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds CONDUIT FOR COMMERCE 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: Servant Foundation · Christian Community Foundation Inc · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Mn Osborne Charitable Foundation Trust 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 Mn Osborne Charitable Foundation Trust?
Find your warmest path to Mn Osborne Charitable Foundation Trust 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.