· Private foundation
Special People in Need
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FREE WHEELCHAIR MISSION | $7,000 |
| CANINE SUPPORT TEAMS | $6,500 |
| CAN DO CANINES ASSISTANCE DOGS | $6,500 |
| PARAGON SERVICE DOGS | $6,500 |
| DISABLED PATRIOTS FUND | $6,000 |
| VARIETY (YTHE CHILDREN'S CHARITY) | $6,000 |
| CENTER FOR MUSIC FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES | $6,000 |
| CATCHING THE DREAM | $6,000 |
| ROARING FORK YOUTH ORCHESTRA | $6,000 |
| KSDS ASSISTANCE DOG INC | $5,000 |
| PAWPADS | $5,000 |
| SOUTHERN METHODIST COLLEGE | $5,000 |
| KINGS AND PRIESTS MINISTRY | $5,000 |
| PREGANCY RESOURCE CENTER INC | $5,000 |
| WOMENS RESOURCE CENTER OF DILLON | $5,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $310k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 68% 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 +28% since the first grant, against +23% for the ones you funded once.
112 repeat relationships — 61 still active in FY2025, 51 since wound down; 18 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $63k 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
- SPSAMARITAN'S PURSE2× · 2023–2024 · $45k · revenue +53%
- CFCENTER FOR MUSIC BY PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES9× · 2017–2025 · $43k · revenue +66%
- CDCAN DO CANINES9× · 2017–2025 · $39k · revenue +61%
Funded once
ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INCone grant, 2024 · $20k · revenue +10%- EDENCORE DEVELOPMENT SERVICESone grant, 2024 · $7k · revenue +0%
- BHBUILDING HOMES FOR HEROES INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $7k · revenue +99%
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.
Provide adaptive sports for the disabled.
"to heal with horses" by offering nationally accredited, affordable, horse-centered therapies and experiences that bring strength, independence, confidence and joy to central oregonians of all ages and abilities.
To change the lives of people with disabilities by promoting their physical, psychological and social well-being through equine-assisted activities.
TURN dreams into reality. We are dedicated to choice, quality and respect for people with disabilities and those who support them.
We improve quality of life through equine-based therapy to physically, mentally and socially/emotionally challenged individuals. Our unique program integrates academic, social and physical skills using the horse as a catalyst.
Living Well Disability Services transforms the lives of people impacted by disabilities through the delivery of exceptional services.
Disability Rights Montana envisions a society where people with disabilities have equality of opportunity and are able to participate fully in community life by exercising choice and self-determination. Because of this vision, the mission…
To create an enviornment where special needs individuals have the opportunity to for independence and growth. This is done by providing special needs adults a day program that fosters a safe, loving and inclusive environment.
To provide child and adult day services, vocational, therapy and support services for individuals with acquired or developmental disabilities or other special needs, and their families.
Leg up farm's pediatric services are unique in that leg up farm is the only facility in the country with the following services beneath one roof: physical, occupational, and speech therapy; mental health, equine-assisted, and nutrition…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Access Living of Metropolitan Chicago and the most unlike its peers is UpRoot Colorado. 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 33 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) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% 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.
132 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. 132 of the 203 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 Catching the Dream ↗
- Who funds SAMARITAN'S PURSE ↗
- Who funds DISABLED PATRIOT FUND INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR MUSIC BY PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES ↗
- Who funds CAN DO CANINES ↗
- Who funds FREE WHEELCHAIR MISSION ↗
- Who funds ALICE LLOYD COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds ABILITY FOUND CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds WOMENS RESOURCE CENTER ↗
- Who funds Pregnancy Resource Center Inc ↗
- Who funds HELP CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Access Living of Metropolitan Chicago ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF THE CUMBERLANDS INC ↗
- Who funds MOUNTAIN STATES LEGAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HAVEN ↗
- Who funds MARTHA'S TABLE INC ↗
- Who funds MANNA FOOD CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds RMH SERVICES ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR HEARING & SPEECH ↗
- Who funds PARAGON SERVICE DOGS ↗
- Who funds SECOND SENSE ↗
- Who funds CANINE SUPPORT TEAMS INC ↗
- Who funds BETHESDA CARES INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN METHODIST COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds Providence St Mel School ↗
- Who funds LESTER AND ROSALIE ANIXTER CENTER ↗
- Who funds WELLSPRING ↗
- Who funds THE NIGHT MINISTRY ↗
- Who funds Still Point Theatre Collective ↗
- Who funds DONKA INCORPORATED ↗
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: Christopher Reeve Foundation · George M Eisenberg Foundation for Charities · Helen V Brach Foundation · Goldenberg Max Tw M G Foundation · Town Pump Charitable Foundation · Max & Victoria Dreyfus Foundation Inc · The Service Club of Chicago · Dennis & Phyllis Washington Foundation · Stern Sidney Memorial Tuw · Jolley Family Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Greater Gallatin United Way 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 Special People in Need 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.
- Bethesda Cares Inc — 100% of income from government
- Dismas of Vermont Inc — 39% of income from government
- Horizons Inc — 39% of income from government
- Usa Warriors Ice Hockey Program Inc Usawihp — 37% of income from government
- Center for Human Development Inc — 26% of income from government
- Special Strides Inc — 2% of income from government
- Western New England University — 1% of income from government
- Manna Food Center Inc — 1% of income from government
- Southeastern Guide Dogs Inc — 0% of income from government
- Theatre Adventure Inc — 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 Special People in Need?
Find your warmest path to Special People in Need 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.