How much did STEPHEN & MARY BIRCH FOUNDATION INC grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 69% of STEPHEN & MARY BIRCH FOUNDATION INC’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

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

2020

uclaboys girlsstationmusicguideliteracyjames catholic

2021

uclamusicjames catholicrussellliteracybrowndance

2022

fisherkrumyoungboys girlsfreedomtherapyukraine

2023

sanctuaryjoeguadalupe valleyworthpedwarheros

2024

wingsbutterflyheroesservicvolonteer firelady mercymercy cath

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 243 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k78 grants · $371k
$10k–50k137 grants · $2.2M
$50k–250k25 grants · $2.0M
$250k+3 grants · $1.5M

$10,000

Median grant

States reached

$125M

Total assets

Largest grants

WACO FAM PRACTICE FDN$750,000
AVE PHILOMENA$500,000
SBCS CORPORATION$250,000
UC SAN DIEGO BIRCH AQUARIUM$225,000
KICK START$200,000
GROSSMONT HOSPITAL FDN$150,000
RUTGERS CANCER INSTITUTE OF NJ$100,000
RAMAPO COLLEGE FOUNDATION$100,000
ST SCHOLASTICA PRIORY$100,000
MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER$100,000
CHRISTIAN HEALTH CARE CENTER$100,000
HOUSE OF UKRAINE$75,000
MCKINLEY PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY$75,000
SAN DIEGO NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM$65,000
OPERATION WARM$65,000

02The need

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 (FY20–24, $1.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12% — the area typically sits at 9%. 71% 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.

62%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$14M · 180 repeat orgs$8.4M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +55% since the first grant, against +52% for the ones you funded once.

180 repeat relationships — 131 still active in FY2024, 49 since wound down; 111 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

180

232

Total granted

$14M

$6.3M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+55%

+52%

Still filing today

36%

39%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.1M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesHealthAnimalsPhilanthropyArts & CultureEducationOther

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

AP
AVE PHILOMENA
3× · 2022–2024 · $625k · revenue +72% · 25% of their budget
RC
RAMAPO COLLEGE FOUNDATION
3× · 2021–2024 · $400k · revenue +36%
MO
MISSION OF DIVINE MERCY INC
4× · 2020–2024 · $350k · revenue +33%

Funded once

CC
COVENANT CHRISTIAN SCHOOL
one grant, 2021 · $500k · revenue -12% · 84% of their budget
TS
THE STATION OF THE CROSS RADIO
one grant, 2020 · $500k
CH
COVENANT HOUSE
one grant, 2020 · $500k

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.

Divine Canines

Divine canines therapy encourages smiles and brightens lives. to accomplish this, we recruit and train teams of dogs and their owners and organize and facilitate regular, frequent visits to residents of special care facilities.

Animals

Hero Dogs Inc

Hero Dogs improves the quality of life of our nations heroes and enhances the services of community organizations by placing assistance dogs with customized training & lifetime support.

Human Services

Companions for Heroes

To champion public awareness of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and challenges confronting our countrys heroes and rally support for shelter animal adoption by connecting heroes and companions.

Human Services

Little Angels Service Dogs

Training and placing assistance dog with disabled children and adults throughout the United States.

Human Services

Dogs Playing for Life Inc

Dogs playing for life is redefining the meaning and importance of quality of life for all sheltered dogs by improving their experience through playgroups and individualized training, resulting in urgent and responsible livesaving.

Animals

Paws With a Cause

Paws With a Cause enhances the independence and quality of life for people with disabilities nationally through custom-trained assistance dogs. Paws increases awareness of the rights and roles of assistance dog teams through education and…

Human Services

Petconnect Rescue Inc

Petconnect rescue is a foster-based animal welfare organization dedicated to saving at-risk dogs and cats, providing them with high quality care, and adopting them to loving homes. we are committed to ensuring a highly positive rescue…

Animals

Hope Hospice Inc

The mission of ("hope hospice") is to provide high quality medical care and emotional support for terminally ill patients and their families/caregivers.

Human Services

Hope Reins

We pair kids in crisis with rescued horses and mentors to find hope and healing.

Health

Welcome Home Angel Inc

Our mission is to help families be families by creating custom home modifications for children with special healthcare needs. from sensory and therapy rooms to fully wheelchair-accessible spaces, our home transformations provide safer…

Environment

Miracles for Kids Inc

Miracles for kids helps families with critically-ill children battle bankruptcy, homelessness, hunger and depression so they can focus on fighting for their child's life.

Recreation & Sports

Pet Peace of Mind

Pet Peace of Mind provides hospices, home health agencies, and hospitals with a turnkey solution to help them establish a program to recruit and train their volunteers to help patients with pet care needs.

Animals

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Minuteman Disaster Response and the most unlike its peers is University of Rochester. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 28 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 9% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/220

the rest of the field

11%

206,164/1,819,345

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.

05the grantee network

206 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

203/206

Grantees still filing

163/206

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$15,663,020Health$1,840,000Human Services$1,276,750Education$1,130,000Religion$1,020,000Philanthropy$609,000Arts & Culture$525,000

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.

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.

Gil and Dody Weaver FoundationTX26.9× affinity11 shared granteesties to 10 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gil and Dody Weaver Foundation · Coserv Charitable Foundation · Hattie Mae Lesley Foundation Inc · W P & Bulah Luse Foundation · The Moody Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · The Cushman Foundation · Thomas M Helen McKee & John P Ryan Fo · The Rees-Jones Foundation · The Ninnie L Baird Foundation · Strake Foundation · Ken W Davis 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 STEPHEN & MARY BIRCH FOUNDATION 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

19get no government money at all

1rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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: CHARACTERS OF CHARACTER NFP.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

2 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up +93% since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 711023253 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 CHARACTERS OF CHARACTER NFP, 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

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2025; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 95% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
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 Stephen & Mary Birch Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Stephen & Mary Birch Foundation 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.

STEPHEN & MARY BIRCH FOUNDATION INC

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

206 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Stephen & Mary Birch Foundation Inc?

More from the funding graph

STEPHEN & MARY BIRCH FOUNDATION INC

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

206 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Stephen & Mary Birch Foundation Inc?

More from the funding graph