Loading…
· Public charity
PLANNED PARENTHOOD ADVOCATES OF ARIZONA
Educate voters, public health officials & public office candidates about sexual health & rights.
$500k
Granted FY2025
1
Grants
1
Communities
$500k
Largest
01What you fund
01
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 78% of PLANNED PARENTHOOD ADVOCATES OF ARIZONA’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2019
training
2020
elections
2021
registrationadvocacyoutreach educationelectionvoter outreach
2022
—
2023
—
2025
—
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2025 · 1 grant
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
$500,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$678k
Total assets
Largest grants
- AZ ABORTION ACCESS$500,000
02The need
04
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 (FY20–21, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11% — the area typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — 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.
35%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$340k · 5 repeat orgs$630k to everyone else
5 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
5
11
Total granted
$340k
$130k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
-23%
+130%
Still filing today
60%
45%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $500k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
Civil RightsHuman ServicesArts & CultureCommunity 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
- AWARIZONA WINS2× · 2018–2019 · $120k · revenue -23%
- ADARIZONA DEMOCRATIC LEGISLATIVE CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE3× · 2019–2021 · $120k
- AFALBA FUNDS2× · 2020–2022 · $50k
Funded once
MIJENTE SUPPORT COMMITTEEone grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue -43%- ARAZ REPRO TABLEone grant, 2023 · $20k
- AAACLU AZone grant, 2023 · $15k · revenue -32%
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
Arizona Latino Leaders in Education
We exist to ensure that individuals from the communities most impacted by education inequities are the ones making decisions for all students
Education
2
Arizona Latin-American
Unclassified
3
Aclu Foundation of Arizona
The mission of the aclu foundation of arizona is to defend and preserve,(cont.on schedule o)through litigation and public education, individual rights and freedoms guaranteed to all by the constitution and the laws of the united states and…
Civil Rights
4
Solutions for an Independent Arizona
Organization mission solutions for an independent arizona envisions an arizona addresses its most pressing issues. independent arizona will identify, unite, and engage voters who want to elect people who will find common ground to serve…
Civil Rights
5
Advancing Az
Organization mission social advocacy and grassroots organization made up of arizonans calling on elected officials to put the issues of arizonans first to protect our access to affordable health care, to build an economy that supports…
—
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
Arizona Advocacy Network
To secure electoral justice, political rights, and full civic participation, especially for the underrepresented and marginalized constituencies, to achieve government for the people, not corporations.
Civil Rights
8
Arizona Center for Investigative Reporting
AZCIR holds powerful people and institutions accountable by exposing injustice and systemic inequities through investigative journalism.
Arts & Culture
9
Arizona Coalition to End Sexual and
To end sexual and domestic violence in arizona by dismantling oppression and promoting equity among all people.
Human Services
10
Opportunity Arizona
Opportunity arizona is an issue advocacy organization whose mission is to grow more opportunities and improve the quality of life for hard-working arizonans.
Civil Rights
11
Arizona Center for Empowerment
Empowering arizonas low to moderate income families, especially members of the large and diverse latino and immigrant communities, to overcome effects of social and economic injustice.
Civil Rights
12
Arizonans for Economic Prosperity
Arizonans for economic prosperity mission is to work toward a prosperous arizona economy for all.
—
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Save Our Schools Arizona and the most unlike its peers is Rural Arizona Engagement. 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
8 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2018–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Other$760,000Civil Rights$145,000Human Services$35,000Arts & Culture$25,000Community Improvement$5,000
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.
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.
Grove Action FundCA13.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Grove Action Fund · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Sixteen Thirty Fund · New Venture Fund · Tides 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 organisation PLANNED PARENTHOOD ADVOCATES OF ARIZONA 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
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: ARIZONA WINS.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
high risk
~0 months of operating runway; revenue contracted over 6 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
6 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 364781665 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on ARIZONA WINS, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- FlagFinancial stability— Roughly 0 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 6% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona?
Find your warmest path to Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
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