How much did NATIONAL CENTER FOR WOMEN AND grant in FY2023?

NATIONAL CENTER FOR WOMEN AND reported 5 grants totaling $2,506,221 in its FY2023 IRS filing.

Where is NATIONAL CENTER FOR WOMEN AND based?

NATIONAL CENTER FOR WOMEN AND is based in CO.

NATIONAL CENTER FOR WOMEN AND

Foundation Dossiers Also receives grants — funding profile →

· Public charity

NATIONAL CENTER FOR WOMEN AND

The mission of the NATIONAL CENTER FOR WOMEN AND information technology is to ensure that women are fully represented in the influential world of information technology/computing.

$2.5M

Granted FY2023

Grants

Communities

$2.1M

Largest

01What you fund

0182% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2018–2023.

Education$14MPhilanthropy$664kEmployment$231kCommunity Improvement$175kPublic Benefit$123kYouth Development$52kHealth$14kOther$3.5M

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2019

seed recipientextensionaspireit recipientundergraduate graduategraduate degreeseducational researchurm award

2020

es-up learninglearning circlesdistinctiveknowledgewake forestlearning cirlcestech

2021

learning circlestuition scholarshipmovementsstudent seedrepresentation recipientaspireit recipientreboot representation

2022

tuition scholarshiptechtechbirminghamecosystemfutureconferencebirmingham

2023

—

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2023 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2023

Under $10k1 grant · $6k
$10k–50k3 grants · $48k
$250k+1 grant · $2.1M

$10,000

Median grant

States reached

$16M

Total assets

Largest grants

UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION$2,107,495
PITTSBURGH TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL$27,500
KEAN UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION$10,000
UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE$10,000
WEST WINDSOR-PLAINSBORO REGIONAL SCHOOL$6,000

02The need

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 (FY18–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 10%. 68% of your 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 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.

82%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$16M · 43 repeat orgs$3.4M to everyone else

43 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2023, 40 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

112

Total granted

$16M

$3.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+12%

+23%

Still filing today

47%

62%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $16k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationEmploymentCommunity ImprovementYouth DevelopmentPhilanthropyHealthOther

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 COLORADO FOUNDATION
4× · 2020–2023 · $11M · revenue +40%
KF
KIPP FOUNDATION
2× · 2019–2021 · $501k · revenue +12%
CORNELL UNIVERSITY
2× · 2019–2021 · $480k · revenue +17%

Funded once

MK
MITCHELL KAPOR FOUNDATIONgraduated
one grant, 2020 · $654k · revenue +153%
AMERICAN INDIAN COLLEGE FUNDgraduated
one grant, 2020 · $456k · revenue +118%
DH
DIGITAL HARBOR FOUNDATIONgraduated
one grant, 2021 · $350k · revenue +7493%

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

04Your 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.

Washington University

The washington university is a co-educational, nondenominational university with a long and distinguished history of teaching, research and (cont'd on schedule o)

Education

Philadelphia University

To improve lives and provide students with exceptional value in 21st century professional education.

Education

William Penn University

William penn university provides the opportunity for an educational experience with a focus on leadership, technology, and the quaker principles of simplicity, peace-making, intergrity, community and equality.

Education

San Francisco State University

To provide private financial support to assist the university in meeting its educational mission.

Education

North Carolina State University

Supports, by financial assistance and otherwise, the various colleges within the university, the libraries, and other university-connected functions.

Education

Washington College

Washington college challenges and inspires emerging citizen leaders to discover lives of purpose and passion.

Education

The Rockefeller University

A world-renowned center for research and graduate education.

Education

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education

University of Chicago

The mission of the university of chicago has been to sustain at the highest level of excellence, the communication of knowledge, the creation of knowledge and the fostering of a dynamic community of scholars and students.

Education

Yale University

To improve the world through research, scholarship, education, preservation, and practice.

Education

Seattle Pacific University

Seattle Pacific University is a Christian university fully committed to engaging the culture and changing the world by graduating people of competence and character, becoming people of wisdom, and modeling grace-filled community.

Education

Southern Methodist University

The Primary mission of the university is education through research and teaching by creating and imparting knowledge that will shape citizens who contribute to their communities and lead professions in a global society.

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The University of Florida Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Westminster University. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 59 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

2%3/156

the rest of the field

11%

3,769/33,261

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.

05the grantee network

92 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

89/92

Grantees still filing

67/92

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Education$14,495,588Other$3,539,884Philanthropy$663,599Employment$230,800Community Improvement$175,170Public Benefit$123,272Youth Development$51,700Health$14,000

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.

American Chemical SocietyDC43.8× affinity19 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Chemical Society · National Collegiate Athletic Association · Folds of Honor Foundation · Tulsa Community Foundation · Hispanic Scholarship Fund · National Collegiate Investors & · Association of Universities for Research · World Learning Inc · American Council of Learned Societies · Foundation for the Carolinas · Kpmg US Foundation Inc · Ernst & Young 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 CENTER FOR WOMEN AND 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

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.

05Through 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: AAUW GREENSBORO BRANCH.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

high risk

2 years of Form 990 filings, no recent filing.

Legal standing

medium risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 813155649 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 AAUW GREENSBORO BRANCH, 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

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
FlagSustained operations— No recent filing on record.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 43% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
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 Center for Women And?

Find your warmest path to National Center for Women And 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.

NATIONAL CENTER FOR WOMEN AND

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

92 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to National Center for Women And?

More from the funding graph

NATIONAL CENTER FOR WOMEN AND

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

92 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to National Center for Women And?

More from the funding graph