· Private foundation
Pritschet Foundation
Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2023
- Under $10k1 grant · $8k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $105k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| IMPACT ASSETS DONOR ADVISED FUND | $105,128 |
| AMAZEWORKS | $7,500 |
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 human-services grants (FY20–21, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 100% of Pritschet 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, 49% of the giving stays in MN; read by stated purpose it is 0% — 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +14% since the first grant, against -5% for the ones you funded once.
8 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2023, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (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 FY2023, 7% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $105k 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
- AAMAZEWORKS4× · 2020–2023 · $50k · revenue +14%
- TAThe Advocates For Human Rights2× · 2020–2021 · $4k · revenue +89%
- UPUJAMAA PLACE2× · 2020–2021 · $2k · revenue +25%
Funded once
- TNTHE NEW IMPACT FUNDone grant, 2022 · $38k · revenue +13%
- UPUS PIRGone grant, 2021 · $2k
- WAWELL AWARE INCone grant, 2021 · $2k · revenue -5%
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.
A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…
To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with Indigenous communities in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability, and the preservation of the Amazon Basin's…
TO Promote the health and well being of African refugee and immigrant women and their families in the twin City area through research, education ,advocacy and programming
To lead and coordinate the global initiative to address and prevent criminalization, violence, and impunity against indigenous peoples towards strengthening their collectives, solidarity, and actions.
Grow businesses, build wealth and increase reinvestement in the african communities of minnesota
To cultivate leaders and community partnerships to advance environmental justice.
APEN builds immigrant and refugee power for a just transition with local roots and statewide impact so all people can live, work, learn, play and thrive in a clean and healthy environment.
Preventing domestic violence and sexual abuse in communities of color throughout minnesota and the nation. by providing culturally-specific resources to women and girls of african descent, we hope to change the cycle of gender-based abuse…
To offer the dignity of fair employment to people living in impoverished communities, who become transformational agents of global forest restoration.
Taproot Earth works with communities to support strategies around the use of water, energy and land.
Sahan Journal provides immigrants and communities of color with free, fair, and responsive journalism that shows everyone the way to a more equitable Minnesota.
To encourage, promote, support, and elect pro-choice women of all political parties to all levels of public office in minnesota.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is One Fair Wage Inc and the most unlike its peers is Indigenous Environmental Network. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 20 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 21 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 AMAZEWORKS ↗
- Who funds THE NEW IMPACT FUND ↗
- Who funds The Advocates For Human Rights ↗
- Who funds AT HOME GROUP ↗
- Who funds HONOR THE EARTH ↗
- Who funds UJAMAA PLACE ↗
- Who funds WELL AWARE INC ↗
- Who funds VEAP Inc ↗
- Who funds MN350 ↗
- Who funds ONE FAIR WAGE INC ↗
- Who funds WOMENS ENVIRONMENTAL INSTITUTE AT AMADOR HILL ↗
- Who funds LEGAL RIGHTS CENTER ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds INDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK ↗
- Who funds National Domestic Workers Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds GRANTMAKERS CONCERNED WITH IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL JUSTICE FUND NORTHWEST ↗
- Who funds Family Tree Inc ↗
- Who funds Midtown and East Phillips Neighborhood Association Inc ↗
- Who funds UNKITAWA ↗
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: The Minneapolis Foundation · Otto Bremer Trust · Fr Bigelow Foundation · Pohlad Family Foundation · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation · Headwaters Foundation for Justice · Tides Foundation · Mortenson Family Foundation · Women's Foundation of Minnesota · Proteus Fund Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc
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 Pritschet 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.
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.