· Private foundation
Palo Verde Valley Community Improvement Fund
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 75% of PALO VERDE VALLEY COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT FUND’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k5 grants · $13k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $80k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $60k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PALO VERDE HOSPITAL | $60,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $40,000 |
| PALO VERDE HOSPITAL | $28,094 |
| BPO ELKS LODGE 1799 | $11,560 |
| Individual grant recipient | $6,500 |
| CALIFORNIA WOMEN FOR AGRICULTURE | $5,000 |
| COLORADO RIVER FAIR JR LIVESTOCK AU | $750 |
| PALO VERDE YELLOW JACKET BOOSTERS | $250 |
| DOBBS DUFFERS FORE CHILDREN | $250 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
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 +363% since the first grant, against +19% for the ones you funded once.
8 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 5 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, 38% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $94k 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
- IGIndividual grant recipient4× · 2019–2025 · $83k
- BLBLYTHE LITTLE LEAGUE INC4× · 2020–2024 · $69k · revenue -48% · 98% of their budget
- BEBPO ELKS LODGE 17992× · 2024–2025 · $60k
Funded once
- ALAMERICAN LEGION 24 FRANK LUCKECAPOSTgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $75k · revenue +158%
- SWSheltering Wings Corporationone grant, 2020 · $51k · revenue -99%
- VOVeterans of Foreign Wars VFWone grant, 2022 · $46k
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.
To provide scholarships for blytheville area students
To provide food supplies to homeless and low income citizens of the palo verde valley, blythe, california
Community service
To provide fire suppression, fire investigation, and search and rescue services to the citizens of clyde and the surrounding rural areas of callahan co., tx.
Community support
Charitable
Promote agriculture and related activities
To promote the preservation, collection and interpretation of wythe county history in its many forms.
To support the community's youth throuogh 4h and ffa organizations
Community jobs and neighborhood support
To assist the local business, governmental and individual community in developing better business relationships and to increase the local revenue base by encouraging tourism and business development.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Blythe Cancer Resource Center and the most unlike its peers is American Legion 24 Frank Luckecapost. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
8 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. 8 of the 30 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 AMERICAN LEGION 24 FRANK LUCKECAPOST ↗
- Who funds BLYTHE LITTLE LEAGUE INC ↗
- Who funds Sheltering Wings Corporation ↗
- Who funds BLYTHE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ↗
- Who funds BLYTHE CANCER RESOURCE CENTER ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA WOMEN FOR AGRICULTURE ↗
- Who funds ROTARY INTERNATIONAL-BLYTHE ROTARY CLUB ↗
- Who funds DOBBS DUFFERS FOR CHILDREN INC ↗
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Palo Verde Valley Community Improvement Fund 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 Palo Verde Valley Community Improvement Fund?
Find your warmest path to Palo Verde Valley Community Improvement Fund 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.