Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

Open Hearts Foundation

Empower people who turn adversity into possibility

$100k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.

Human Services$506kHealth$262kFood & Nutrition$169kHousing & Shelter$125kInternational$97kYouth Development$93kCrime & Legal$77kCommunity Improvement$59kOther$0
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$25,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$670k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITY YOUTH NOW$25,000
CHINLE PLANTING HOPE$25,000
SOLIDARITY SANDY SPRINGS$25,000
MANNA CONEJO VALLEY FOOD BANK$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 (FY17–24, $538k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 92% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%THE LIVING ROOM: $15k → 9%CITY YOUTH NOW: $25k → 10%SHARIA'S CLOSET: $15k → 11%ASSOCIATION TO BENEFIT CHILDREN: $25k → 17%FOSTER ANGELS OF SOUTH TEXAS: $15k → 17%THE RIGHT PATH: $7k → 15%ADELANTE MUJERES: $7k → 8%SAFE ALLIANCE: $10k → 10%SHELIFT: $20k → 7%THE WHEELER MISSION: $100k → 16%CITY YOUTH NOW: $11k → 10%ASSOCIATION TO BENEFIT CHILDREN: $10k → 17%FOSTER ANGELS OF SOUTH TEXAS: $10k → 17%SAFE ALLIANCE: $10k → 10%CITY YOUTH NOW: $10k → 10%HARLEM CHILDREN'S ZONE: $25k → 17%SAFE ALLIANCE: $10k → 10%PROJECT GLIMMER: $38k → 10%PROJECT GLIMMER: $35k → 10%JENESSE CENTER: $36k → 14%JENESSE CENTER: $35k → 14%JENESSE CENTER: $10k → 14%EXCEPTIONAL MINDS: $60k → 14%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

NH
NY
OR
IN
PA
CA
CO
NE
VA
AZ
NC
OK
GA
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.

69%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.0M · 25 repeat orgs$471k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +23% since the first grant, against +21% for the ones you funded once.

25 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 21 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

25
17

Total granted

$1.0M
$471k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+23%
+21%

Still filing today

100%
94%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
Human ServicesHealthPhilanthropyCommunity ImprovementFood & NutritionEducationOther

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

  • AN
    A NEW WAY OF LIFE REENTRY PROJECT
    4× · 2018–2022 · $102k · revenue +162%
  • JC
    Jenesse Center Inc
    3× · 2018–2020 · $81k · revenue +215%
  • PG
    PROJECT GLIMMER
    2× · 2018–2019 · $73k · revenue +936%

Funded once

  • WM
    WHEELER MISSION MINISTRIES INC
    one grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue -8%
  • GM
    GLOBAL MOBILITY
    one grant, 2017 · $72k · revenue -96%
  • EM
    EXCEPTIONAL MINDS
    one grant, 2017 · $60k · revenue +25%

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
Children's Law Center of California

Children's law center of california (clc) provides legal representation for children and youth impacted by abuse and neglect. we advocate for our clients by supporting families; fighting for reunification, permanence, educational…

—
2
California Alliance of Caregivers

California Alliance of Caregivers represents the voices of relative and non-relative caregivers to promote the well-being of children in foster care. California Alliance of Caregivers provides training information support and advocacy for…

Health
3
The Children's Law Center

To provide legal services to indigent children in contested custody/ visitation and related cases.

Crime & Legal
4
Solano Family & Childrens Council Inc

Solano Family & Children's Services promotes and advocates for the well-being of children, their families, and child care providers by offering access to a variety of child care resources.

Human Services
5
Childrens Legal Services of San Diego

The purpose of providing legal representation and advocacy to foster children and youth in the San Diego County courts.

Philanthropy
6
Child Lane

Child lane provides care in an environment where play is valued and children are supported to reach their full potential.

Human Services
7
San Francisco Casa

San Francisco CASA transforms the lives of children and youth traumatized and displaced in the foster care and related systems by providing one consistent, caring volunteer advocate, trained to address each childs needs in the court and…

Civil Rights
8
Children's Legacy Center

We exist to give hope, provide healing, and ensure justice for abused and neglected children in our community.

Youth Development
9
Family Promise of Santa Clarita Valley

With assistance of volunteers from the community and faith groups, the organization works to assist homeless children and their families to achieve sustainable independence, while offering hope, compassion, and preserving individual…

Housing & Shelter
10
La Luz Center

Strengthen community through family services, economic advancement, and community engagement. our vision is: one sonoma valley community working together where all have equal opportunity to succeed.

Human Services
11
Loving Hands Childrens Home

Provide loving home environment, continuity of care, and empowerment of displaced and fragile children.

Housing & Shelter
12
Childrens House International

Children's house international provides ethical adoption services, child focused recruitment, and family support. we support disadvantaged children with humanitarian aid in countries worldwide.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is My Sisters Place Inc and the most unlike its peers is Global Mobility. 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 backsteadyChild Abuse Advocacy Servic…Food Banks and PantriesHealth Access Advocacy and …Independent K-12 SchoolsImmigrant Worker SupportEquine Therapy ProgramsCommunity FoundationsDomestic Violence 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 26 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number24%0%<5yr15%11%5–10yr20%32%10–20yr17%24%20–35yr11%18%35–55yr13%16%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value24%0%<5yr15%7%5–10yr20%35%10–20yr17%25%20–35yr11%16%35–55yr13%17%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%0/42
the rest of the field
14%
26,003/186,936

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

42 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
11
Early backer (in before they grew)
41/42
Grantees still filing
31/42
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

WHEELER MISSION MINISTRIES INC — $100,000 · Human ServicesWHEELER MISSION MINISTRIES INCJenesse Center Inc — $80,582 · Human ServicesJenesse Center IncPROJECT GLIMMER — $72,932 · Human ServicesPROJECT GLIMMEREXCEPTIONAL MINDS — $60,000 · Human ServicesEXCEPTIONAL MINDSFOSTER ANGELS OF SOUTH TEXAS FOUNDATION — $50,000 · Human ServicesFOSTER ANGELS OF SOUTH TEXAS FOUNDATIONCITY YOUTH NOW FKA VOLUNTEER AUXILIARY YOUTH GUIDANCE CENTER OF SAN FRANCISCO — $45,550 · Human ServicesCITY YOUTH NOW FKA VOLUNTEER AUXILIARY YOU…ASSOCIATION TO BENEFIT CHILDREN — $35,000 · Human ServicesASSOCIATION TO BENEFIT CHILDRENSafe Alliance Inc — $30,000 · Human ServicesHARLEM CHILDREN'S ZONE INC — $25,000 · Human ServicesSheLift — $20,000 · Human Services+4 more — $44,000 · Human Services+4 moreA NEW WAY OF LIFE REENTRY PROJECT — $102,332 · HealthA NEW WAY OF LIFE REE…GLOBAL MOBILITY — $72,000 · HealthGLOBAL MOBILITYLending Hearts — $40,000 · HealthLending HeartsCLAIRE'S PLACE FOUNDATION INC — $37,000 · HealthCLAIRE'S PLACE FOUNDA…KIDS COMMUNITY CLINIC OF BURBANK — $25,000 · HealthKIDS COMMUNITY CLINIC…+1 more — $5,000 · HealthMending Kids International dba Mending Kids — $45,000 · OtherMending Kids Internat…VOICES FOR CHILDREN OF TAMPA BAY INC — $45,000 · OtherVOICES FOR CHILDREN O…My Sisters Place Inc — $35,000 · OtherMy Sisters Place IncALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN'S RIGHTS — $30,000 · OtherALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN…NAMI Central Texas — $20,000 · OtherNAMI Central TexasAssistance League Coachella Valley — $12,000 · OtherSTEPPING STONES LEARNING CENTER — $14,000 · OtherSHENANDOAH VALLEY SCHOLARS LATINO INITIATIVE INC — $14,000 · OtherHOME AGAIN LOS ANGELES — $25,000 · OtherHOME AGAIN LOS ANGELE…BLUEBIRD CULTURAL INITIATIVE — $15,000 · OtherSONOMA FAMILY MEAL — $15,000 · OtherCASA OF EL PASO INC — $15,000 · OtherBAY AREA LYME FOUNDATION — $60,000 · PhilanthropyBAY AREA …CREIGHTON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $35,000 · PhilanthropyCREIGHTON…VOLUNTEER CENTER SOUTH BAY-HARBOR- LONG BEACH — $27,000 · PhilanthropyVOLUNTEER…SOLIDARITY SANDY SPRINGS INC — $37,000 · Food & NutritionMANNA CONEJO VALLEY FOOD DISTRIBUTION CENTER INC — $35,000 · Food & NutritionREDWOOD EMPIRE FOOD BANK — $25,000 · Food & NutritionCHILDREN OF INMATES INC — $47,000 · Community ImprovementCHINLE PLANTING HOPE — $32,000 · Community ImprovementCONEJO COMMUNITY OUTREACH — $15,000 · Community ImprovementThe Childrens Lifesaving Foundation — $60,000 · Recreation & Sports
Human Services$563,064Health$281,332Other$285,000Philanthropy$122,000Food & Nutrition$97,000Community Improvement$94,000Recreation & Sports$60,000

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 budgetA NEW WAY OF LIFE REENTRY PROJECT — $102,332 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetWHEELER MISSION MINISTRIES INC — $100,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetJenesse Center Inc — $80,582 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetPROJECT GLIMMER — $72,932 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetGLOBAL MOBILITY — $72,000 over 1y, 4.7% of budgetEXCEPTIONAL MINDS — $60,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetBAY AREA LYME FOUNDATION — $60,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetThe Childrens Lifesaving Foundation — $60,000 over 4y, 4.5% of budgetFOSTER ANGELS OF SOUTH TEXAS FOUNDATION — $50,000 over 4y, 2.1% of budgetCHILDREN OF INMATES INC — $47,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetCITY YOUTH NOW FKA VOLUNTEER AUXILIARY YOUTH GUIDANCE CENTER OF SAN FRANCISCO — $45,550 over 3y, 4.6% of budgetMending Kids International dba Mending Kids — $45,000 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetVOICES FOR CHILDREN OF TAMPA BAY INC — $45,000 over 4y, 6.5% of budgetLending Hearts — $40,000 over 4y, 5.2% of budgetSOLIDARITY SANDY SPRINGS INC — $37,000 over 2y, 3.2% of budgetCLAIRE'S PLACE FOUNDATION INC — $37,000 over 3y, 6.4% of budgetCREIGHTON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $35,000 over 3y, 6.6% of budgetMANNA CONEJO VALLEY FOOD DISTRIBUTION CENTER INC — $35,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetASSOCIATION TO BENEFIT CHILDREN — $35,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMy Sisters Place Inc — $35,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCHINLE PLANTING HOPE — $32,000 over 2y, 4.2% of budgetALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN'S RIGHTS — $30,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetSafe Alliance Inc — $30,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetVOLUNTEER CENTER SOUTH BAY-HARBOR- LONG BEACH — $27,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetREDWOOD EMPIRE FOOD BANK — $25,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHARLEM CHILDREN'S ZONE INC — $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKIDS COMMUNITY CLINIC OF BURBANK — $25,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetHOME AGAIN LOS ANGELES — $25,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetNAMI Central Texas — $20,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetSheLift — $20,000 over 1y, 31% of budgetBLUEBIRD CULTURAL INITIATIVE — $15,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetTHE LIVING ROOM CENTER — $15,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetSharias Closet — $15,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetSONOMA FAMILY MEAL — $15,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetCONEJO COMMUNITY OUTREACH — $15,000 over 1y, 26% of budgetCASA OF EL PASO INC — $15,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetSTEPPING STONES LEARNING CENTER — $14,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetSHENANDOAH VALLEY SCHOLARS LATINO INITIATIVE INC — $14,000 over 1y, 6.4% of budgetAssistance League Coachella Valley — $12,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetADELANTE MUJERES — $7,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE RIGHT PATH RIDING ACADEMY INC — $7,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetChildren's Hospital Los Angeles — $5,000 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.

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.

Sempra FoundationCalifornia Community …The Rose Hills Founda…Marin Community Found…The San Francisco Fou…Silicon Valley Commun…National Philanthropi…Paypal Charitable Giv…American Online Givin…Ge Aerospace Foundati…American Endowment Fo…Charities Aid Foundat…
Sempra FoundationCA14.5× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sempra Foundation · California Community Foundation · The Rose Hills Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Ge Aerospace Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America

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 Open Hearts 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
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%8%17%30%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 31%
  • Adelante Mujeres — 31% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
14report 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, FY20–25

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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Open Hearts Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Open Hearts Foundation 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 42 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 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

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 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