· Public charity
Paperseed Foundation Inc
To provide grants to help education-focused organizations become self-sustaining.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NAMASTE DIRECT | $1,250 |
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.
Your US giving — 81% of grant dollars ($415k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 19% that went abroad ($96k) is mapped below.
Your human-services grants (FY20–21, $78k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those 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.
Which US states your grants reach
Beyond the US — 19% of all-years giving ($96k)
5 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 12% of Paperseed Foundation Inc’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, 22% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 18% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
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.
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.
12 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2023, 11 since wound down.
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 FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- CACREATIVE ACTION INSTITUTE INC4× · 2017–2021 · $129k · revenue +612%
- FIFILLING IN THE BLANKS INC2× · 2020–2021 · $43k · revenue +57%
- TKTHE KILGORIS PROJECT2× · 2018–2020 · $42k · revenue +52%
Funded once
- MFMILAAN FOUNDATIONone grant, 2018 · $24k
CAPE ELEUTHERA FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $20k · revenue +89%- VVVIDA VERDE NATURE EDUCATIONone grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue -18%
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.
Gvi foundation aims to deliver global experiences promoting sustainable development, conservation, education and the development of purposeful careers for the common good. our mission is positively aligned with the united nations…
Together women rise champions gender equality because womens rights are human rights. when women and girls are treated equally, the world is healthier, safer, more peaceful, inclusive, and economically just for everyone.
Our mission is to equip underserved youthespecially women and girls with future-ready skills in technology Agile methodologies and entrepreneurship empowering them to access dignified work drive innovation and compete globally.
We work to ensure all girls can access and complete 12 years of education. by completing 12 years of quality schooling, girls will have the knowledge, skills and confidence they need to reach their full potential, make their own life…
As our world becomes increasingly interconnected and we experience an era of unprecedented world challenges, underserved communities need help overcoming steep barriers to enriching learning opportunities such as international educational…
Abundant village works at the intersection of social impact and conservation, with a primary focus on regenerating under-resourced communities living in or adjacent to critical biodiversity areas. abundant village co-creates community-led…
To strengthen young women's civic participation and leadership
Rri's mission is to support local communities and indigenous peoples' struggles against poverty and marginalization by promoting greater global commitment and action towards policy, market, and legal reforms that secure their rights to…
Iyf is a global ngo that prepares young people to be healthy, productive and engaged citizens.
GAIAs mission is to strengthen grassroots social movements that advance solutions to waste and pollution, working towards a just, zero waste world where people are free from toxic pollution.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Girl Rising and the most unlike its peers is Keep California Beautiful Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
11 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. 11 of the 28 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 CREATIVE ACTION INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds FILLING IN THE BLANKS INC ↗
- Who funds THE KILGORIS PROJECT ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF ZANAAFRICA CORP ↗
- Who funds Keep California Beautiful Inc ↗
- Who funds CAPE ELEUTHERA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds VIDA VERDE NATURE EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds GROUNDWORK BRIDGEPORT INC ↗
- Who funds Girl Rising ↗
- Who funds NAMASTE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Youth in Arts ↗
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: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · 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 Paperseed 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Groundwork Bridgeport Inc — 100% of income from government
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 Paperseed Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Paperseed 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.