· Private foundation
Rural Alaska Community Action Program Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 75% of Rural Alaska Community Action Program Foundation’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $10k
- $10k–50k11 grants · $179k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $68k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $67,750 |
| Southeast Regional Resource Center | $25,000 |
| Native Village of Larsen bay | $23,500 |
| Best Beginnings | $19,000 |
| Four Winds Resource Center | $17,336 |
| Ella B Vernetti School | $17,231 |
| Native Village of Mary's Igloo | $15,000 |
| Alaska Avalanche Information Center | $14,500 |
| Akiak Native Community | $13,310 |
| Trailmarker Ministries | $12,000 |
| Safe | $11,100 |
| Kokhanok Village Council | $10,613 |
| Individual grant recipient | $8,650 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,355 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 83% of your 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.
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.
10 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 12 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 14% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $221k 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
- DWDANCING WITH THE SPIRIT3× · 2020–2022 · $193k
- SRSOUTHEAST REGIONAL RESOURCE CENTER3× · 2021–2024 · $35k · revenue -5%
- QTQAWALANGIN TRIBAL COUNCIL2× · 2018–2023 · $30k
Funded once
- AANSEPone grant, 2021 · $50k
- FAFIRST ALASKANS INSTITUTEgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $40k · revenue +117%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $25k
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.
Our mission is to support the long-term sustainability of our regions coastal communities of Alutiiq heritage. We do this in three ways, 1. Leadership & Advocacy, 2. Community Development, and 3. Our Stories.
Since 1971, the northern alaska environmental center has promoted environmental conservation and sustainable resource stewardship in interior and arctic alaska through education and advocacy.
Qutekcak native Tribe was created to promote the unity, self-determination and empowerment on the native population residing in Seward, Alaska and the surrounding areas.
To advance solutions that build the resilience and sustainability of Alaska, for its current and future residents and the natural systems upon which they depend.
The Museum of the Aleutians shall collect, preserve, and share the rich cultural legacy of the Aleutian Islands Region.
To protect, perpetuate, and enhance the cultural, social, political and economic traditions for the tlingit, haida and tsimshian tribes of southeast alaska natives. the institute encourages and promotes the preservation and maintenance of…
Icc alaska exists as the unified voice and collective spirit of alaskan inuit, to promote, protect and advance inuit culture and society.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is First Alaskans Institute and the most unlike its peers is Robert Aqqaluk Newlin Sr Memorial Trust. 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 13 years old; the field is 19. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 15% of your grantees by number, and just 47% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% 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.
18 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. 18 of the 71 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 FIRST ALASKANS INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds SOUTHEAST REGIONAL RESOURCE CENTER ↗
- Who funds OPT IN Kiana ↗
- Who funds HEALTHY ALASKA NATIVES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ALEUTIAN PRIBILOF ISLANDS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds ALUTIIQ HERITAGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BEST BEGINNINGS ↗
- Who funds ALASKA AVALANCHE INFORMATION CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds TRAILMARKER MINISTRY ↗
- Who funds SKIKU INC FORMERLY NORDIC JOURNEYS INC ↗
- Who funds SEE STORIES ↗
- Who funds Jilkaat Kwaan Heritage Center ↗
- Who funds KAWERAK INC ↗
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 Alaska Community Foundation · Rasmuson Foundation · Alaska Children's Trust · Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium · The CIRI Foundation · Rural Alaska Community Action Program · Alaska Humanities Forum · First Nations Development Institute · Seventh Generation Fund for Indigenous Peoples Inc · Frances & David Rose Foundation · Museums Alaska Inc · Alaska Conservation 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 organization Rural Alaska Community Action Program 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Rural Alaska Community Action Program Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Rural Alaska Community Action Program Foundation 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.