Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Pace-Able Private 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.

$148k
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$50k
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.

International$607kEducation$584kHealth$142kCommunity Improvement$51kYouth Development$41kFood & Nutrition$41kAnimals$3kEmployment$500Other$0
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k5 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $36k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $100k
$4,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$2.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Pastoral Women's Council$50,000
Elimu Fanaka Foundation$50,000
Myriad USA$23,900
Individual grant recipient$12,000
Biosorra$4,000
The Akaa Project$2,500
Individual grant recipient$2,000
All Five$2,000
Silicon Valley Urban Debate League$2,000
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.

Your US giving — 79% of grant dollars ($1.2M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 21% that went abroad ($322k) is mapped below.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $53k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 95% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Canine Companions for Independence Inc: $1k → 9%Elimu Fanaka Foundation: $50k → 10%Canine Companions for Independence Inc: $1k → 9%Canine Companions for Independence: $500 → 9%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

NY
MA
IA
CA
CO
NC
GA
FL

Beyond the US — 21% of all-years giving ($322k)

7 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
United Kingdom$141k · 6 grants
Tanzania$60k · 2 grants
Kenya$54k · 2 grants
Uganda$24k · 2 grants
Rwanda$23k · 2 grants
Zimbabwe$12k · 1 grant
Mauritius$8k · 2 grants

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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 9% of Pace-Able Private Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 29% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 22% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Pace-Able Private Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 29% directed abroad (not shown)

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

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.

68%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.0M · 14 repeat orgs$489k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
14

Total granted

$1.0M
$419k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
+90%

Still filing today

57%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 43% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $71k 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
InternationalEducationHealthHuman ServicesPhilanthropyCommunity ImprovementOther

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

  • EG
    ECHOING GREEN INC
    5× · 2017–2021 · $225k · revenue +107%
  • RC
    ROOT CAPITAL INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $80k · revenue +8%
  • AM
    African Mission Healthcare Foundation
    2× · 2019–2021 · $40k · revenue +26%

Funded once

  • TR
    THE RODDENBERRY FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $185k · revenue +177%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $56k
  • OS
    Opero Services
    one grant, 2023 · $46k

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
Waterorg

Water.org's goal is to bring safe water and sanitation to the world through access to small, affordable loans.

International
2
Earthenable Inc

Earthenable works to solve the housing crisis in africa by revolutionizing the rural housing industry through innovative, affordable, and sustainable home-building solutions. its mission is to create healthier, safer, and climate-resilient…

International
3
Accion International

Our mission is to create a fair and inclusive economy where underserved people have quality financial choices and opportunities to improve their economic well-being. we find and help build innovative companies with the potential to reach…

International
4
Well Aware Inc

Well Aware's mission is to provide innovative and sustainable solutions to water scarcity and contamination in East Africa.

International
5
Devworks International

Devworks international is dedicated to a society where all people enjoy the freedom to pursue their own sustainable development. we contribute to this by strengthening the capacity of local organizations.

Human Services
6
Keralink International Inc

Keralink international works to end avoidable blindness by developing, delivering, and scaling affordable solutions for all, powered by innovative technology and partnerships.

Health
7
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
8
Nuru International

Nuru is a global collective that enables inclusive and sustainable prosperity by identifying communities at the stability tipping point, strengthening rural livelihoods and market systems, and fostering stabilizing connections that repair…

International
9
Partners in Food Solutions

Improve the food value chain in developing countries by mobilizing corporate volunteers to share knowledge and expertise with small and growing food processors.

International
10
Trustafrica

Promote peace, democracy and economic prosperity in Africa.

International
11
The One Campaign

The ONE Campaign ("ONE") continued its work to educate and raise awareness among the public, media and policymakers around the world about the importance of official development assistance and international programs that (Continued on…

Unclassified
12
Global Greengrants Fund

Global greengrants fund seeds grassroots environmental action and social justice through small grants. we support change from the ground up by channeling donations to local projects and grassroots campaigns for environmental justice around…

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cycle Connect Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Roddenberry Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 21 of the 35 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/21
Grantees still filing
11/21
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Pastoral Women's Council — $60,000 · OtherPastoral Women's CouncilIndividual grant recipient — $56,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientPromoting Equality in African Schools — $55,409 · OtherPromoting Equality in African …Opero Services — $46,000 · OtherOpero ServicesInspiring Futures — $30,000 · OtherInspiring FuturesBiosorra — $29,000 · OtherBiosorraABSOLUTE RETURN FOR KIDS US INC — $29,000 · OtherABSOLUTE RETURN FOR KIDS US IN…Shona Capital Limited — $23,713 · OtherShona Capital LimitedIndividual grant recipient — $22,700 · OtherIndividual grant recipientAfrican Mission Healthcare (fiscal sponsor of Banyatereza Sisters) — $20,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $15,888 · Other+5 more — $27,700 · Other+5 moreECHOING GREEN INC — $224,941 · EducationECHOING GREEN INCTHE RODDENBERRY FOUNDATION — $185,000 · EducationTHE RODDENBERRY FOUNDATION+2 more — $4,000 · EducationCYCLE CONNECT INC — $205,000 · InternationalCYCLE CONNECT INCROOT CAPITAL INC — $80,000 · InternationalROOT CAPITAL INCSANERGY INC — $40,000 · InternationalSANERGY INCAfrican Mission Healthcare Foundation — $40,000 · InternationalAfrican Mission Healthcare Fo…MYRIAD USA INC — $23,900 · InternationalMYRIAD USA INC+2 more — $12,500 · InternationalOne World Childrens Fund — $176,600 · PhilanthropyOne World Chi…WATSI INC — $70,000 · HealthNOORA HEALTH — $3,250 · Health+1 more — $250 · HealthELIMU FANAKA FOUNDATION INC — $50,000 · Human ServicesCANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC — $2,500 · Human ServicesBLACK FARMER FUND INC — $1,000 · Community ImprovementUPWARDLY GLOBAL — $500 · Employment
Other$415,410Education$413,941International$401,400Philanthropy$176,600Health$73,500Human Services$52,500Community Improvement$1,000Employment$500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetECHOING GREEN INC — $224,941 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetCYCLE CONNECT INC — $205,000 over 4y, 16% of budgetTHE RODDENBERRY FOUNDATION — $185,000 over 1y, 7.1% of budgetOne World Childrens Fund — $176,600 over 6y, 1.1% of budgetROOT CAPITAL INC — $80,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetWATSI INC — $70,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetELIMU FANAKA FOUNDATION INC — $50,000 over 1y, 28% of budgetSANERGY INC — $40,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetAfrican Mission Healthcare Foundation — $40,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetABSOLUTE RETURN FOR KIDS US INC — $29,000 over 2y, 3.8% of budgetMYRIAD USA INC — $23,900 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBRAC USA INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNOORA HEALTH — $3,250 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC — $2,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetAll Five — $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSilicon Valley Urban Debate League — $2,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetBLACK FARMER FUND INC — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUPWARDLY GLOBAL — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLava Mae — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEDIC MOBILE INC — $250 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 ECHOING GREEN INC
  • Who funds CYCLE CONNECT INC
  • Who funds THE RODDENBERRY FOUNDATION
  • Who funds One World Childrens Fund
  • Who funds ROOT CAPITAL INC
  • Who funds WATSI INC
  • Who funds ELIMU FANAKA FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds SANERGY INC
  • Who funds African Mission Healthcare Foundation
  • Who funds ABSOLUTE RETURN FOR KIDS US INC
  • Who funds MYRIAD USA INC
  • Who funds BRAC USA INC
  • Who funds NOORA HEALTH
  • Who funds GIRL UP INITIATIVE UGANDA
  • Who funds CANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC
  • Who funds All Five
  • Who funds Silicon Valley Urban Debate League
  • Who funds BLACK FARMER FUND INC
  • Who funds UPWARDLY GLOBAL
  • Who funds Lava Mae
  • Who funds MEDIC MOBILE INC

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.

Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA20.3× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Rippleworks Inc · Mulago Foundation · The Skoll Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Segal Family Foundation Inc · Dovetail Impact Foundation (Fka David Weekley Family Foundation) · Skoll Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Marin Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program

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 Pace-Able Private 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 · 20%2%8%17%30%your share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 9%
  • Root Capital Inc9% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
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 35 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