Skip to content
Rotary International District 7620 at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Rotary International District 7620

Support the approximately 66 local Rotary and Rotaract clubs etc.

$172k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Employment$1.0MInternational$155kCommunity Improvement$110kPhilanthropy$81kYouth Development$50kCrime & Legal$23kPublic Benefit$18kEducation$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 8 grants below total $74,600, the rows itemized in this filing. The $171,539 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $96,939 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.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $31k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $43k
$7,050
Median grant
2
States reached
$225k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Rockville Rotary Club Foundation$20,300
Parole Rotary Club$13,000
Rotary Club of Mt Airy$10,000
Howard West Rotary Club$7,050
Rotary Foundation of Washington DC$7,000
Rotary Club of Annapolis$6,250
Rotary Club of Potomac Passport$6,000
Rotary Club of Capitol Hill$5,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 94% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%Rotary Club of Capitol Hill: $5k → 14%Rotary Club of Prince Frederick: $5k → 5%Rotary Club of Mt Airy: $10k → 6%Rotary Club of Columbia Patuxent: $11k → 6%Rotary Club of Annapolis: $6k → 6%District 7620 Project Trust Fund: $10k → 8%Rotary Club of Charlotte Hall Fdn: $5k → 8%Pikesville-Owings Mills Rotary Club: $8k → 11%Rotary Club of Carroll Creek: $5k → 6%Howard West Rotary Club: $7k → 6%Parole Rotary Club: $13k → 6%Rotary Club of Potomac Passport: $6k → 8%Raymond Van Huizen: $30k → 11%Howard West Rotary Club: $6k → 6%Parole Rotary Club: $10k → 6%Rotary Club of Metro Bethesda Fdn: $1.0M → 8%Rotary Club of Metro Bethesda Fdn: $13k → 8%Rotary Club of Montgomery Village: $5k → 8%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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

7%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$93k · 4 repeat orgs$1.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +89% since the first grant, against +3% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
18

Total granted

$93k
$1.2M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+89%
+3%

Still filing today

75%
39%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 63% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $27k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’20’23’24’25
PhilanthropyCommunity ImprovementOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • RR
    Rockville Rotary Club Foundation Inc
    3× · 2023–2025 · $40k · revenue +89%
  • PR
    Parole Rotary Club Foundation Inc
    2× · 2024–2025 · $23k · revenue +25%
  • RF
    Rotary Foundation of Washington DC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $17k · revenue +155%

Funded once

  • MR
    MetroBethesda Rotary Club Inc
    one grant, 2023 · $1.0M · revenue -26%
  • RC
    Rotary Club Lviv Ukraine
    one grant, 2023 · $50k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $30k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its 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
Rotary International Club Charitable Foundation
Philanthropy
2
Rotary International

to provide community as well as worlwide assistance to those in need.

—
3
Rotary International

Rotary is an organization of business and professional leaders united worldwide who provide humanitarian service, encourage high ethical standards in all vocations, and help build goodwill and peace in the world. The main objective of…

—
4
Rotary Club of Southern Frederick County Charitable Foundation Inc
International
5
Rotary International

Service club

—
6
Rotary International

The object of the rotary is to encourage and foster the ideal of service as a basis of worthy enterprise.

—
7
Rotary International Dublin Am Rotary Club

Raising funds to provide community service at home and throughout the world.

—
8
The Rotary Club of Snoqualmie Valley

Service and funding to various organizations throughout our community and worldwide.

Human Services
9
Rotary International Sunrise Club

Humanitarian Service

—
10
Rotary Club of Montgomeryrocky Hill Foundation Inc

The men and women of rotary are business and professional leaders who volunteer their time and resources to help others in their local communities and throughout the world. the objective of the rotary foundation is to raise funds and make…

Education
11
Rotary International

To promote and aid local and international charities devoted to children, education, the arts and rotary international activities.

—
12
Rotary Club of Columbia Patuxent Charitable Trust

Support local charities & international projects.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rotary International Rotary Club of Carroll Creek Inc; the most unlike its peers is Parole Rotary Club Foundation Inc. 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

12 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 12 of the 27 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MetroBethesda Rotary Club Inc: $1,004,813 · OtherMetroBethesda Rotary Club IncRotary Club Lviv Ukraine: $50,000 · Other+18 more: $186,333 · Other+18 moreTHE ROTARY FOUNDATION OF ROTARY INTERNATIONAL: $150,000 · InternationalTHE ROTARY …Rockville Rotary Club Foundation Inc: $39,700 · PhilanthropyMetroBethesda Rotary Foundation Inc: $12,500 · PhilanthropyROTARY CLUB OF ANNAPOLIS FOUNDATION: $6,250 · PhilanthropyFriends in Need of Ellicott City Rotary Club Inc: $5,000 · PhilanthropyTHE CHARLOTTE HALL ROTARY FOUNDATIO: $5,000 · PhilanthropyRotary Foundation of Washington DC: $17,000 · Community Improvement
Other$1,241,146International$150,000Philanthropy$68,450Community Improvement$17,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE ROTARY FOUNDATION OF ROTARY INTERNATIONAL: $150,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRockville Rotary Club Foundation Inc: $39,700 over 3y, 11% of budgetParole Rotary Club Foundation Inc: $22,980 over 2y, 18% of budgetRotary Foundation of Washington DC: $17,000 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetMetroBethesda Rotary Foundation Inc: $12,500 over 1y, 6.4% of budgetRotary Club of Columbia Patuxent Inc: $11,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetROTARY CLUB OF ANNAPOLIS FOUNDATION: $6,250 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetMontgomery Village Rotary Club Foundation: $5,000 over 1y, 31% of budgetFriends in Need of Ellicott City Rotary Club Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetTHE CHARLOTTE HALL ROTARY FOUNDATIO: $5,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetROTARY INTERNATIONAL ROTARY CLUB OF CARROLL CREEK INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.6% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA1.4× affinity8 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Rotary International District 7620 funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rotary International District 7620. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 80%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    8get 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 · 0–5%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Rotary International District 7620?

    Find your warmest path to Rotary International District 7620 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.

    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 27 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Rotary International District 7620’s 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