Skip to content
Mother Cabrini League at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Mother Cabrini League

Promoting spiritual welfare

$422k
Granted FY2022
5
Grants FY2022
4
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2022.

International$45kReligion$25kPhilanthropy$25kEnvironment$10kSocial Science$10k
02FY2022 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $90,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $421,882 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $331,882 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$20,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$6.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JDS$25,000
AFRICAN SISTERS LEADERS IN ACTION (ASLA)$25,000
ASYLUM ACCESS$20,000
FRANCESCO COLLABORATIVE ( COMMUNITY COOPERATIVE)$10,000
CATHOLIC IMPACT INVESTING COLLABORATIVE (CIIC)$10,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 61% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%ASYLUM ACCESS: $20k → 10%JDS: $25k → 17%CATHOLIC IMPACT INVESTING COLLABORATIVE (CIIC): $10k → 14%NATIONAL SHRINE CABRINI: $25k → 14%AFRICAN SISTERS LEADERS IN ACTION (ASLA): $25k → 6%FRANCESCO COLLABORATIVE ( COMMUNITY COOPERATIVE): $10k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Grants abroad, by region: $332k on the FY2022 return

Schedule F, as filed: 6 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

South Asia$175k · 53% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: REFUGEES & IMMIGRANTS · REFUGEES AND IMMIGRANTS

Russia and Neighboring States$45k · 14% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: REFUGEES & IMMIGRANTS · REFUGEES AND IMMIGRANTS AND RACIAL JUSTICE

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$37k · 11% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: RESEARCH · GENERAL SUPPORT FOR YOUR WORK IN ADVOCACY, AWARENESS RAISING AND EDUCATION OF COMMUNITIES, WOMEN, CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS IN THE CRITICAL TOPIC OF FEMALE GENTILE CUTTING (FGC)

Middle East and North Africa$30k · 9% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CRISIS AND POVERTY, REFUGEES AND IMMIGRANTS

Central America and the Caribbean$25k · 8% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CRISIS AND POVERTY

Sub-Saharan Africa$20k · 6% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CARING FOR OUR COMMON HOME; UPLIFTING THOSE IN RURAL POVERTY

How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its field
04the grantee network

6 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
1/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc: $25,000 · InternationalThe American Jewish Joint Distribution Commi…ASYLUM ACCESS: $20,000 · InternationalASYLUM ACCESSTHE NATIONAL SHRINE OF ST FRANCES XAVIER CABRINI INC: $25,000 · OtherTHE NATIONAL SHRINE OF ST FRANCES …Catholic Climate Covenant: $10,000 · OtherCatholic Climate CovenantNATIONAL CATHOLIC COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $25,000 · PhilanthropyNATIONAL CATHOLIC COMMUN…Community Cooperative dba Francesco Collaborative: $10,000 · Social ScienceCommunity…
International$45,000Other$35,000Philanthropy$25,000Social Science$10,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE NATIONAL SHRINE OF ST FRANCES XAVIER CABRINI INC: $25,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetThe American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL CATHOLIC COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetASYLUM ACCESS: $20,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCatholic Climate Covenant: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCommunity Cooperative dba Francesco Collaborative: $10,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO6.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Mother Cabrini League funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mother Cabrini League. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s 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, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Mother Cabrini League?

    Find your warmest path to Mother Cabrini League 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 6 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Mother Cabrini League’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home