Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

New Challenge Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$8k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What you fund
0195% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172024.

Education$50kHuman Services$37kFood & Nutrition$14kHealth$10kRecreation & Sports$3kReligion$2kInternational$2kPublic Safety & Disaster$2kOther$0
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$500
Median grant
3
States reached
$282k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UC MERCED - MICHAEL RAMIREZ$2,500
UCLA - ASHTON ST GERMAINE$2,500
RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY COLLEGE - ISABE$1,500
PHOENIX CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION$500
CROSS CATHOLIC OUTREACH$200
SOUTH BAY COMMUNITY SERVICES$200
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$100
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 (FY17–24, $16k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 9% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%FOR GOODNESS CAKES: $300 → 14%PEDAL THE CAUSE: $50 → 21%RYAN HOUSE: $500 → 11%RYAN HOUSE: $300 → 11%VIKING FOUNDATION: $100 → 10%SOUTH BAY COMMUNITY SERVICES: $200 → 11%CATERINA'S CLUB: $4k → 10%CATERINA'S CLUB: $2k → 10%CATERINA'S CLUB: $2k → 10%CATERINA'S CLUB: $2k → 10%CATERINA'S CLUB: $2k → 10%CATERINA'S CLUB: $2k → 10%CATERINA'S CLUB: $1k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 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

MN
IL
IN
CA
UT
MO
VA
MD
AZ
TN
TX
FL

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.

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.

60%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$76k · 21 repeat orgs$51k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +48% since the first grant, against +8% for the ones you funded once.

21 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 20 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
45

Total granted

$76k
$44k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+48%
+8%

Still filing today

52%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 3% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthHuman ServicesEducationFood & NutritionCommunity ImprovementInternationalOther

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

  • OH
    OPERATION HOMEFRONT INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $16k · revenue +41%
  • CC
    CATERINAS CLUB
    7× · 2017–2023 · $14k · revenue +83%
  • MK
    Marys Kitchen
    7× · 2017–2023 · $11k · revenue +144%

Funded once

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ
    one grant, 2018 · $3k
  • WI
    WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2019 · $3k
  • CC
    CHAFFEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
    one grant, 2017 · $3k

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.

1
Scripps Health

Founded in 1924 by philanthropist Ellen Browning Scripps, Scripps Health is a $4.9 billion, private not-for-profit integrated health system in San Diego, Ca. (see Sch O)

Health
2
Feeding San Diego

On a mission to connect every person facing hunger with nutritious meals by maximizing food rescue. through direct service and community partnerships, feeding san diego provides more than 26 million meals each year to children, families,…

Food & Nutrition
3
Banner -University Medical Group

Assist banner health complete its mission to make health care easier so life can be better by providing integrated & coordinated care & population health management.

Health
4
Sutter Bay Hospitals

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
5
United Food Bank

United Food Bank unites communities to alleviate hunger.

Food & Nutrition
6
The San Diego Foundation

The san diego foundation inspires enduring philanthropy and enables community solutions to improve the quality of life in our region.

Philanthropy
7
City of Hope

City of Hope's mission is to make hope a reality for all touched by cancer and diabetes. PLEASE SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A CONTINUATION OF OUR MISSION

Health
8
Children's Hospital Los Angeles

Promotion and advancement of children's health through patient care, research, and education.

Health
9
Foodbank of Santa Barbara County Inc

To end hunger and transform the health of our community by providing nourishment to those in need by acquiring and distributing safe nutritious food via local agencies and by providing education to solve hunger and nutritional problems in…

Food & Nutrition
10
Usc Arcadia Hospital Foundation

Mission statement the mission of usc arcadia hospital foundation educates and inspires the community to generously support quality medical care at usc arcadia hospital.

Health
11
California Pacific Medical Center Foundation

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
12
Usc Arcadia Hospital

To provide high-quality healing services while caring for the patient's emotional and spiritual needs and enabling them to achieve health for life.

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jacobs & Cushman San Diego Food Bank and the most unlike its peers is Viking Foundation. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyFood Pantries & AssistanceCancer Support OrganizationsCommunity Health CentersFallen First Responder Supp…Community FoundationsPublic School District Foun…Animal Rescue and AdoptionPublic University Foundatio…Faith-Based Liberal Arts Co…Veteran Support Services
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 35 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number24%0%<5yr15%3%5–10yr20%27%10–20yr17%20%20–35yr11%20%35–55yr13%30%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value24%0%<5yr15%1%5–10yr20%38%10–20yr17%37%20–35yr11%8%35–55yr13%16%55yr+

The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/36
the rest of the field
14%
26,003/186,942

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.

04the grantee network

31 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 31 of the 72 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
29/31
Grantees still filing
21/31
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

BRIMFIELD HIGH SCHOOL — $7,500 · OtherBRIMFIELD HIGH SCHOOLFULLERTON COLLEGE — $5,500 · OtherFULLERTON COLLEGEAUGIE'S QUEST — $4,700 · OtherAUGIE'S QUESTTHE SALVATION ARMY — $3,250 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ — $2,500 · OtherUCLA - ASHTON ST GERMAINE — $2,500 · OtherWESTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY — $2,500 · OtherCHAFFEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT — $2,500 · OtherRIVERSIDE CITY COLLEGE — $2,500 · OtherBRIMFIELD CUSD 309 — $2,500 · OtherUC MERCED - MICHAEL RAMIREZ — $2,500 · Other+39 more — $33,500 · Other+39 moreOPERATION HOMEFRONT INC — $16,000 · Community ImprovementOPERATION HOME…CATERINAS CLUB — $14,300 · Human ServicesCATERINAS CLUBRYAN HOUSE — $800 · Human Services+4 more — $650 · Human ServicesMarys Kitchen — $10,900 · Food & NutritionMarys Kitch…ST MARY'S FOOD BANK ALLIANCE — $850 · Food & NutritionST MARY'S F…JACOBS & CUSHMAN SAN DIEGO FOOD BANK — $600 · Food & NutritionGrand Canyon University — $1,500 · EducationCALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY SAN MARCOS CORPORATION — $1,500 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF LA VERNE — $1,000 · EducationUniversity of San Francisco — $1,000 · EducationVALLEY CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL — $1,100 · HealthJessie Rees Foundation — $1,000 · HealthNICK AND KELLY CHILDRENS HEART FUND — $500 · HealthST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC — $500 · HealthBREAST CANCER FUNDRAISER — $500 · HealthPhoenix Children's Hospital Foundation — $500 · HealthCaringBridge — $500 · HealthDIRECT RELIEF — $1,000 · International
Other$71,950Community Improvement$16,000Human Services$15,750Food & Nutrition$12,350Education$5,000Health$4,600International$1,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetOPERATION HOMEFRONT INC — $16,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCATERINAS CLUB — $14,300 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetMarys Kitchen — $10,900 over 7y, 0.9% of budgetGrand Canyon University — $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY SAN MARCOS CORPORATION — $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVALLEY CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL — $1,100 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUTAH FOOD BANK — $1,100 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF LA VERNE — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of San Francisco — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJessie Rees Foundation — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCASA DE LOS NINOS — $850 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetST MARY'S FOOD BANK ALLIANCE — $850 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER TUCSON FIRE FOUNDATION — $800 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetRYAN HOUSE — $800 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetROUTE91STRONG — $800 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetJACOBS & CUSHMAN SAN DIEGO FOOD BANK — $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC — $500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBREAST CANCER FUNDRAISER — $500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetPhoenix Children's Hospital Foundation — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCaringBridge — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAN DIEGO RESCUE MISSION INC — $450 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetRIVERSIDE HUMANE SOCIETY PET ADOPTION CENTER — $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLa Casa de las Madres — $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSBCS CORPORATION — $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetViking Foundation — $100 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetINTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPEDAL THE CAUSE — $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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 OPERATION HOMEFRONT INC
  • Who funds CATERINAS CLUB
  • Who funds Marys Kitchen
  • Who funds Grand Canyon University
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY SAN MARCOS CORPORATION
  • Who funds VALLEY CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL
  • Who funds UTAH FOOD BANK
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF LA VERNE
  • Who funds DIRECT RELIEF
  • Who funds University of San Francisco
  • Who funds Jessie Rees Foundation
  • Who funds CASA DE LOS NINOS

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.

Michael & Susan Dell FoundationTX13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Michael & Susan Dell Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 organization New Challenge Foundation 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 72 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph