· Private foundation
Project Dialogue
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2022.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Partners in Health | $4,500 |
| Trevor Project | $950 |
| Planned Parenthood Keystone | $750 |
| Innocence project | $750 |
| MAPS | $750 |
| Individual grant recipient | $750 |
| The Purple Door | $750 |
| WRRAP | $750 |
| Schools on Wheels | $750 |
| We Care Youth Coalition | $600 |
| North Texas Food Bank | $550 |
| Individual grant recipient | $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 (FY21–22, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 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.
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 +64% since the first grant, against +17% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2022, 0 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (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 FY2022, 17% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
TREVOR PROJECT INC2× · 2021–2022 · $1k · revenue +64%- WCWe Care Youth Coalition2× · 2021–2022 · $1k
- NTNORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK2× · 2021–2022 · $1k · revenue +12%
Funded once
- G(GlobalGiving (Aid to Afghanistan)one grant, 2021 · $720
- PIPartners in Health (for Haiti Relief)one grant, 2021 · $600
- YEYoung Eisner Scholarsone grant, 2021 · $500 · revenue -55%
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.
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
Pathfinder expands access to sexual and reproductive health services, opening the door to opportunities for women and all individuals to thrive-economically, educationally, and civically. driven by our country-led leadership and local…
Our mission is to improve the performance of health workers and strengthen the systems in which they work.
To encourage, promote, support, and elect pro-choice women of all political parties to all levels of public office in minnesota.
Women donors network advances a just, equitable, and sustainable world through the power of philanthropy, women's leadership, and collective and individual action.
Ultraviolet education fund (uvef) is a 501c3 organization. ultraviolet is the premier national organization advocating for gender justice issues using creative, strategic campaigning and digital-first organizing. ultraviolet drives…
The elizabeth glaser pediatric aids foundation (egpaf) is a proven leader in the fight against pediatric hiv/aids and has reached over 33 million pregnant women with services to prevent transmission of hiv to their babies. to date, egpaf…
Women in global health (wgh) is a global movement and organization that brings together all genders and backgrounds to achieve gender equality in global health leadership.
As a leading charitable foundation and healthcare advocacy organization, the pan foundation is dedicated to accelerating access to treatment for those who need it most and empowering patients on their healthcare journeys. we provide…
We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world. we take a multidisciplinary, intergenerational, life-cycle approach that contributes to (see schedule o)four global…
National institute for reproductive health, inc. works to protect and advance equitable access to reproductive health care by building power at the state and local level. using an approach that is rooted in partnerships with state and…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Coalition for Women With Heart Disease Inc and the most unlike its peers is Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 24 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.
26 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. 26 of the 37 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 PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds TREVOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds Women's Reproductive Rights Assistance Project ↗
- Who funds SCHOOL ON WHEELS INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S SHELTER OF SOUTH TEXAS ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD KEYSTONE ↗
- Who funds THE INNOCENCE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds Young Eisner Scholars ↗
- Who funds POETIC ↗
- Who funds Youth With Faces ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL INDIGENOUS WOMENS RESOURCE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL COALITION FOR WOMEN WITH HEART DISEASE INC ↗
- Who funds Grace Medical Home Inc ↗
- Who funds ASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE - AAJC INC ↗
- Who funds PARKLAND CARES INC ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT HEALTHY CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds Time For Change Foundation ↗
- Who funds HELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds AMERICANS FOR IMMIGRANT JUSTICE INC F/K/A FLA IMMIGRANT ADVOCACY CENTER ↗
- Who funds GIVEDIRECTLY INC ↗
- Who funds BLACK ECONOMIC COUNCIL OF MASSACHUSETTS INC ↗
- Who funds The Against Malaria Foundation ↗
- Who funds MALARIA CONSORTIUM US INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF PBC ↗
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: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · National Philanthropic Trust · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Network for Good · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program
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 Project Dialogue 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.
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% 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 Project Dialogue?
Find your warmest path to Project Dialogue 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.