Skip to content

· Private foundation

Stich Charitable Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$755k
Granted FY2025still arriving
14
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$255k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2025.

Youth Development$490kEducation$309kAnimals$280kCommunity Improvement$178kEmployment$50kHuman Services$50kFood & Nutrition$15kHousing & Shelter$15kOther$0
02FY2025 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $60k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $430k
  • $250k+1 grant · $255k
$50,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$16M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JESSE LEWIS CHOOSE LOVE MOVEMENT INC$255,000
DOG STAR RESCUE INC$130,000
WOMENS MENTORING NETWORK INC$100,000
JESSE LEWIS CHOOSE LOVE MOVEMENT INC$50,000
CATHOLIC ACADEMY OF BRIDGEPORT INC$50,000
LIVEGIRL$50,000
WOOFGANG AND CO$50,000
JESSE LEWIS CHOOSE LOVE MOVEMENT INC$30,000
FISH FRIENDS IN SERVICE TO HUMANITY OF NORTHWESTER$15,000
AREA CONGREGATIONS TOGETHER INC$15,000
JESSE LEWIS CHOOSE LOVE MOVEMENT INC$4,350
WOMENS MENTORING NETWORK INC$3,400
INNER COMPASS INITIATIVE INC$1,400
JESSE LEWIS CHOOSE LOVE MOVEMENT INC$1,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY25–25, $50k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%LIVEGIRL: $50k → 9%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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 4 repeat orgs$155k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
1

Total granted

$1.2M
$24k

Still filing today

75%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $131k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’23’24’25
Housing & ShelterYouth DevelopmentAnimalsCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesEmploymentOther
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

  • JL
    JESSE LEWIS CHOOSE LOVE MOVEMENT INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $490k · revenue 0%
  • CA
    CATHOLIC ACADEMY OF BRIDGEPORT INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $285k
  • DS
    DOG STAR RESCUE INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $280k · revenue 0%

Funded once

  • CS
    COLLEGE STREET CAPITAL CORPORATION
    one grant, 2023 · $24k
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
New Haven Works Inc

To grow the local economy and improve economic stability in all communities by providing employers with a trained and qualified workforce and connecting residents to jobs.

Education
2
Together We Bake

Together We Bake's mission is to provide a comprehensive workforce training and personal development program to help women gain self-confidence, transferable workforce skills, and invaluable hands-on experience which will allow them to…

Human Services
3
Goodwill of Western and Northern Connecticut Inc

Goodwill of western and northern ct (gwnc) strengthens communities by eliminating barriers to employment and maximizing the independence of all people served.

Employment
4
Women's Business Development Council Inc

Tthe mission of the women's business development council (wbdc) is to support economic prosperity for women and strengthen communities through entrepreneurial and financial education services that create and grow sustainable jobs and…

Education
5
Womens Network Inc

Womens Coop is women helping women working together to improve lives families and our community. We foster an active network of support that provides much needed resources for career training education and life management.

Human Services
6
Northwest Regional Workforce Investment Board Inc

Northwest regional workforce investment board, inc is a not-for-profit corporation organized to develop and oversee a complete system of services for the employment and training of connecticut's workforce, concentrating in danbury,…

—
7
Opportunities Industrialization Center of New Britain Inc

Our mission is to help people to help themselves by contributing to the more efficient functioning of todays labor market by providing high quality employment and training.

—
8
Connecticut Humane Society

The connecticut humane society is the leading resource in the state for companion animal welfare, enriching the lives of families and communities through adoption services, medical care, education, and prevention of cruelty.

Animals
9
Womens Employment Network

Our Mission is to help women raise their self-esteem and achieve economic independence through sustained employment. Our Vision is to advance positive change in the lives of women, their families and the community, one woman at a time.

Employment
10
Eastern Connecticut Workforce Investment Board Inc

EWIB efficiently coordinates employment-related services in concert with a multitude of state and local agencies at benefit to both businesses and job-seekers. These services offer new opportunities and/or skills to the regional workforce,…

Employment
11
The Connecticut Center for Nursing Workforce Inc

To foster collaborations to ensure a highly educated, diverse and sustainable nursing workforce to support the healthcare needs of connecticut residents.

Health
12
United Way of Meriden & Wallingford Inc

The united way of meriden and wallingford is a volunteer-driven organization that redirects human and financial resources to create lasting change in our communities by supporting residents to gain an education and training sufficient to…

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Fishfriends in Service to Humanity of; the most unlike its peers is Inner Compass Initiative 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

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 10 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
1/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JESSE LEWIS CHOOSE LOVE MOVEMENT INC: $490,350 · Youth DevelopmentJESSE LEWIS CHOOSE LOVE MOVEMENT INCCATHOLIC ACADEMY OF BRIDGEPORT INC: $285,000 · OtherCATHOLIC ACADEMY OF BRIDG…COLLEGE STREET CAPITAL CORPORATION: $23,500 · OtherCOLLEGE STREET CAPITAL CO…DOG STAR RESCUE INC: $280,000 · AnimalsDOG STAR RESCUE INCWOMEN'S MENTORING NETWORK INC: $178,400 · Community ImprovementWOMEN'S MENTOR…LiveGirl Inc: $50,000 · Human ServicesTEAM WOOFGANG & CO INC: $50,000 · EmploymentFISHFRIENDS IN SERVICE TO HUMANITY OF: $15,000 · Housing & ShelterAREA CONGREGATIONS TOGETHER INC: $15,000 · Housing & ShelterINNER COMPASS INITIATIVE INC: $1,400 · Health
Youth Development$490,350Other$308,500Animals$280,000Community Improvement$178,400Human Services$50,000Employment$50,000Housing & Shelter$30,000Health$1,400

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetJESSE LEWIS CHOOSE LOVE MOVEMENT INC: $490,350 over 2y, 11% of budgetDOG STAR RESCUE INC: $280,000 over 2y, 14% of budgetWOMEN'S MENTORING NETWORK INC: $178,400 over 2y, 28% of budgetLiveGirl Inc: $50,000 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetTEAM WOOFGANG & CO INC: $50,000 over 1y, 7.9% of budgetFISHFRIENDS IN SERVICE TO HUMANITY OF: $15,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetAREA CONGREGATIONS TOGETHER INC: $15,000 over 1y, 1.2% 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Ge Aerospace FoundationCT11.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ge Aerospace Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Stich Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Stich Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →median 30%
  • Fishfriends in Service to Humanity of: 39% of income from government
  • Area Congregations Together Inc: 30% of income from government
  • Women's Mentoring Network Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get 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 · 0–60%
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.

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 10 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-PF 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 Stich’s filings →

More from the funding graph