Skip to content
Phoenix Rotary Club Charities at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Phoenix Rotary Club Charities

PHOENIX ROTARY CLUB CHARITIES supports the humanitarian, educational and other community service projects and programs of phoenix rotary 100.

$85k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$14k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Human Services$124kHealth$21kFood & Nutrition$12kHousing & Shelter$8kYouth Development$7k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $13,700, the rows itemized in this filing. The $84,745 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $71,045 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$13,700
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PHOENIX DREAM CENTER$13,700
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY17–19, $62k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 92% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%ADOPT A NATIVE ELDER: $5k → 8%OPERATION SCHOOL BELL: $57k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Arizona Latin-American Medical Association
Unclassified
2
The Dons of Arizona
Education
3
Az Hugs
Human Services
4
Arizona Wins

Az wins is a coalition of organizations dedicated to achieving public policies that benefit working arizona families and advancing an inclusive, engaged, just and equitable state for all arizonans. in 2024 az wins substantially reduced its…

Civil Rights
5
Yavapai Big Brothers Big Sisters Foundation
—
6
Pro-Choice Arizona

Pro-Choice Arizona centers abolition and reproductive justice values to prioritize community needs. We advance reproductive equity, pregnancy and family justice, and abortion access for all folks living in Arizona through direct service…

Health
7
Arizonans for Children Inc

Arizonans for children inc. exists to faciliate opportunities and provide effective solutions to improve and stabilize the fragile lives of foster children

Human Services
8
Laced With Love

To provide resources to children in AZ DCS Custody

Human Services
9
Arizona Friends of Foster Children Foundation

Arizona Friends of Foster Children Foundation creates opportunities to build self-esteem and empower children and youth in foster care by funding social, athletic and educational activities and services to enrich their life experiences and…

Human Services
10
Arizona Healthiest State Foundation
—
11
Arizona Legal Women and Youth Services

No cost legal services provided to vulnerable young people and trafficking survivors to help eliminate barriers to safety, stability, and opportunity. Specializing in family law, criminal history repair, vital document collection, and…

Crime & Legal
12
Arizona Next Level Basketball Found
Recreation & Sports
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Delivering Dreams of Arizona; the most unlike its peers is Arizona Anti-Trafficking Network. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 12 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Delivering Dreams of Arizona: $57,000 · Human ServicesDelivering Dreams of ArizonaARIZONA ANTI-TRAFFICKING NETWORK: $29,471 · Human ServicesARIZONA ANTI-TRAFFICKING NETWORKAdopt-A-Native Elder: $5,000 · Human ServicesAdopt-A-Native ElderWHEELCHAIR FOUNDATION: $15,500 · OtherWHEELCHAIR FOUNDATIONPHOENIX DREAM CENTER: $13,700 · OtherPHOENIX DREAM CENTERCOMMUNITY INFORMATION & REFERRAL: $9,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY INFORMATION & REFERRALFAMILY PROMISE: $7,500 · OtherFAMILY PROMISEUPWARD FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES: $5,000 · OtherUPWARD FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIESST LUKES EPISCOPAL COMMUNITY SRVICE: $5,000 · OtherST LUKES EPISCOPAL COMMUNITY SRVICEARIZONA DENTAL FOUNDATION: $5,000 · OtherARIZONA DENTAL FOUNDATIONKITCHEN ON THE STREET INC: $12,000 · Food & NutritionHomeless Youth Connection Inc: $6,500 · Youth Development
Human Services$91,471Other$60,700Food & Nutrition$12,000Youth Development$6,500

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetARIZONA ANTI-TRAFFICKING NETWORK: $29,471 over 2y, 5.4% of budgetKITCHEN ON THE STREET INC: $12,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetCOMMUNITY INFORMATION & REFERRAL: $9,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetHomeless Youth Connection Inc: $6,500 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetAdopt-A-Native Elder: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetARIZONA DENTAL FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Arizona Community Fou…John F Long Foundatio…William & Ruth Pendle…American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
Arizona Community FoundationAZ17.2× affinity6 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Arizona Community Foundation · John F Long Foundation Inc · William & Ruth Pendleton Memorial Fund US Bank National Association · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Phoenix Rotary Club Charities funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Phoenix Rotary Club Charities. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 12 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $490k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Phoenix Rotary Club Charities’ filings →

    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 endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home