Loading…
· Public charity
NATIONAL CAPITAL AFFORDABLE
Promoting and developing affordable housing, including but not limited to special needs housing for persons with mental and other disabilities to become re-integrated into the community.
$809k
Granted FY2019
5
Grants
3
Communities
$317k
Largest
01What you fund
0190% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2019.
Philanthropy$634kHealth$130kHousing & Shelter$50kCommunity Improvement$50kHuman Services$25kOther$100k
02FY2019 · 5 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2019
- $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $150k
- $250k+2 grants · $634k
$100,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
- COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF FLORIDA$317,136
- COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF DC$317,135
- JUBILEE HOUSING$100,000
- FRIENDS OF GUEST HOUSE$50,000
- HOMELESS CHILDRENS PLAYTIME PROJECT$25,000
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:
Your human-services grants (FY19–19, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
03Your field
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.
1
Community Housing Partnership
Providing affordable housing to underserved communities locally and around the world.
Housing & Shelter
2
Community Foundation of Washington
To support education, health, arts and other quality of life enhancements through contributions to 501(c)(3) organizations and governmental agencies.
Philanthropy
3
Capital Area Housing Partnership
Develops neighborhoods with a focus on affordable housing, homeownership, and financial security.
Housing & Shelter
4
Community Housing Council
Housing & Shelter
5
The Washington Home Inc
Health
6
Community Housing Partnership
Community housing partnership's mission is to help homeless people secure housing and become self-sufficient.
Housing & Shelter
7
Everyone Home Dc
We support the holistic needs of individuals and families at risk of or experiencing homelessness. Housing is our starting point. Seeing people thrive is our finish line.
Human Services
8
Capital City Housing Foundation
Affordable housing
Housing & Shelter
9
Iccf Community Homes
To provide safe, clean, affordable and high quality housing to persons of low and moderate income to encourage family responsibility and independence.
Housing & Shelter
10
Capital Community Partners
—
11
Friendship Place
Friendship Place is a leader in the Washington, DC, metro area in developing solutions to homelessness that have measurable results and a lasting impact. Friendship Place's mission is to empower people who are experiencing or at risk of…
Housing & Shelter
12
Community Partners for
Cpah is focused on the development of permanent housing for low-income individuals, families and seniors in washington and multnomah counties. cpah also supports cpah residents with resident services, community building and skill building…
Housing & Shelter
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Transitional Housing Corporation and the most unlike its peers is Greater Washington Community Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network
8 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Philanthropy$634,271Health$130,000Other$100,000Housing & Shelter$50,000Community Improvement$50,000Human Services$25,000
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.
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.
The Morris and Gwendolyn CafritzDC13.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: The Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz · Greater Washington Community Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 organisation NATIONAL CAPITAL AFFORDABLE 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.
2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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.
04Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: PLAN OF MDDC.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
low risk
~15 months of operating runway; revenue contracted over 7 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 521422392 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on PLAN OF MDDC, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 15 months of cash on hand.
- WatchSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 5% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to National Capital Affordable?
Find your warmest path to National Capital Affordable through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines