· Private foundation
Noll Foundation Inc
Its FY2025 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 FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $5k
- $10k–50k14 grants · $400k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $410k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HOPE INSTITUTE FOR CHILDREN & FAMILIES | $150,000 |
| AMIGOS MINISTRIES | $80,000 |
| PARTNERS RELIEF & DEVELOPMENT | $70,000 |
| JF KAPNEK TRUST | $60,000 |
| GRACE REFUGE OUTREACH WORLDWIDE | $50,000 |
| AGAPE CHILDREN'S MINISTRY | $45,000 |
| CHILDREN OF FAITH MISSIONS | $40,000 |
| BEAUTIFUL RESPONSE | $40,000 |
| PALS PROGRAM | $35,000 |
| DOWN SYNDROME CONNECTION | $35,000 |
| ARM OF CARE | $30,000 |
| YOUNG LIFE - SAN RAMON | $30,000 |
| YOUNG LIFE - MOUNTAIN WEST REGION | $30,000 |
| MISSIONARY ATHLETES INTERNATIONAL | $25,000 |
| BAY AREA URBAN NETWORK (BAUN PROJECT) | $25,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $687k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 33% 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 +24% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
32 repeat relationships — 17 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $130k 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
- DSDOWN SYNDROME CONNECTION OF THE BAY AREA9× · 2017–2025 · $326k · revenue +56%
- YLYOUNG LIFE6× · 2017–2022 · $312k · revenue +59%
- PCPADRINO CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION INC8× · 2017–2024 · $312k · revenue +963%
Funded once
- GOGRACE OPENS DOORS CHARITABLE FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $15k
- STSHOULDER TO SHOULDERone grant, 2017 · $10k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2019 · $10k
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.
assisting orphans and missionary in need
Childrens Home and Ministry in India
Reaching Out To The Nations' mission is to both preach and demonstrate the love of Go through its projects and programs which include preaching, food distribution, widow and orphan assistance and leadership training.
Fund raising for compassionate ministries and ministerial support.
Support of Orphaned, Displaced or Abandoned children.
Help struggling families and children who have been adopted from international families in other countries work to adjust to their new life and bring some into other families
Create faith-filled environment for chil
Church ministry
We minister to orphans and widows in their distress by transitioning children from orphanages into loving families. We do this through Christ- centered care, training and social work.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Agape Children's Ministry Inc and the most unlike its peers is Grace Opens Doors Charitable 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.
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 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
21 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. 21 of the 43 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 DOWN SYNDROME CONNECTION OF THE BAY AREA ↗
- Who funds YOUNG LIFE ↗
- Who funds PADRINO CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds AGAPE CHILDREN'S MINISTRY INC ↗
- Who funds ARM OF CARE INC ↗
- Who funds THE BAY AREA URBAN NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds Missionary Athletes International and Charlotte Eagles Inc ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN OF FAITH MISSIONS ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS RELIEF & DEVELOPMENT ↗
- Who funds THE FORGE FOR FAMILIES ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN OF STRENGTH ↗
- Who funds Grace Refuge Outreach Worldwide ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR HOPE INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds EMBRACE WASHINGTON ↗
- Who funds NEW MISSION SYSTEMS INC ↗
- Who funds Kids Alive International Inc ↗
- Who funds HOPE INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds GRACE OPENS DOORS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SHOULDER TO SHOULDER ↗
- Who funds SONRISE EQUESTRIAN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds KATIE NUES FOUNDATION ↗
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: Christian Community Foundation Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Verizon Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc
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 Noll Foundation Inc 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 Noll Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Noll Foundation Inc 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.