Loading…
· Public charity
Rose Giving Inc
ROSE stands for Reach Out * Serve * EmpowerWe are a group of highly motivated, caring, TPC Twin Cities women members who share a commitment to make a difference in our community.
$118k
Granted FY2024
1
Grants
1
Communities
$110k
Largest
01What you fund
0198% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.
Human Services$303kHealth$160kYouth Development$140kArts & Culture$110kRecreation & Sports$1kOther$16k
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
2018
youthscholarships students
2019
scholarships students
2021
food
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2024 · 1 grant
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
$110,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$93k
Total assets
Largest grants
- Lyric Arts Company of Anoka$110,000
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 (FY17–21, $303k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11% — the area typically sits at 7%. 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.
2%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$16k · 3 repeat orgs$714k to everyone else
3 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
3
8
Total granted
$16k
$604k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+7%
+63%
Still filing today
100%
75%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $110k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
Human ServicesHealthYouth DevelopmentRecreation & SportsArts & CultureOther
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
- SLSpring Lake Park High School Local Scholarship3× · 2017–2019 · $7k · revenue +37%
- BCBlaine Community Scholarship Association3× · 2017–2019 · $7k · revenue +7%
- LCLee Carlson Center for Mental Health and Wellbeing2× · 2017–2018 · $2k · revenue -39%
Funded once
- GMGundersen Medical Foundation Jacob Wetterling Resource Centergraduatedone grant, 2017 · $160k · revenue +28%
- SFSafe Families for Childrengraduatedone grant, 2019 · $160k · revenue +281%
- HFHope for Communitygraduatedone grant, 2021 · $140k · revenue +242% · 36% of their budget
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
Gundersen Lutheran Health System Inc
To support gundersen lutheran medical center, inc. and gundersen clinic, ltd. and/or their affiliates' programs of health care, medical education, medical research and community health promotion activities within the meaning of sec…
Health
2
Lonsdale Area Food Shelf Inc
Provide emergency food relief for the families in the Lonsdale MN region .
Food & Nutrition
3
Minnewaska Lutheran Home
Nursing home a community of services grounded in faith providing person centered care
—
4
Minnesota Council on Foundations
Connecting, strengthening & mobilizing the power of philanthropy to advance prosperity & equity
—
5
Mankato Area Foundation
To be a trusted resource that connects donors with causes they care about.
—
6
Loon Lake Food Pantry & Resource Center
The Mission of Loon Lake Food Pantry & Resource Center is to feed the hungry and provide food to persons in need, to establish support systems that promote and maintain the food bank, and to assist in the resource development and growth of…
—
7
Minnesota Council of Nonprofits Inc
Inform, promote, connect and strengthen individual nonprofits and the nonprofit sector.
Philanthropy
8
Nebraska Community Foundation
The nebraska community foundation unleashes abundant local assets, inspires charitable giving, and connects ambitious people to build stronger communities and a greater nebraska.
Philanthropy
9
Lyndale Neighborhood Association
The mission of the Lyndale Neighborhood Association (LNA) is to be the vehicle for our community members to shape their neighborhood. Our vision is to engage our diverse community members to build a safe, vibrant, and sustainable…
Community Improvement
10
Northwest Community Healthcare
NORTHWEST COMMUNITY HEALTHCARE follows the mission of Endeavor Health to "help everyone in our communities be their best."
Health
11
Avera Health
Promotion of health
Health
12
Swedish Covenant Health
Swedish Covenant Health follows the mission of Endeavor Health to "help everyone in our communities be their best."
—
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Sports Center Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Spring Lake Park Lions School District. 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
11 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/11
Grantees still filing
9/11
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Human Services$303,000Health$160,250Youth Development$140,000Arts & Culture$110,000Other$16,000Recreation & Sports$1,000
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.
- Who funds Gundersen Medical Foundation Jacob Wetterling Resource Center ↗
- Who funds Safe Families for Children ↗
- Who funds Hope for Community ↗
- Who funds Hope 4 Youth Inc ↗
- Who funds Lyric Arts Company of Anoka ↗
- Who funds Spring Lake Park High School Local Scholarship ↗
- Who funds Blaine Community Scholarship Association ↗
- Who funds Lee Carlson Center for Mental Health and Wellbeing ↗
- Who funds NACE ↗
- Who funds North Metro Pediatrics ↗
- Who funds The First Tee of Blaine ↗
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.
Connexus Energy FoundationMN13.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Connexus Energy Foundation · Allina Health System · Otto Bremer Trust · 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 organisation Rose Giving 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
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: Hope for Community.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
low risk
~12 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 3.4× since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 463680832 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 Hope for Community, 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
- On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 12 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 36% 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 Rose Giving Inc?
Find your warmest path to Rose Giving Inc 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