· Private foundation
The Andrew C Virostek Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
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.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k8 grants · $16k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $104k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $70k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CORNERSTONE MINISTRIES | $70,000 |
| VARIOUS FAMILY CRISIS DONATIONS | $43,731 |
| SHEEP INC HEALTH CARE CENTER | $20,660 |
| GOOD SHEPHERD INDIA | $10,000 |
| REFUGE FOR WOMEN | $10,000 |
| DEL REY MINISTRIES | $10,000 |
| YOUNG OVERCOMERS UNITED | $10,000 |
| BIBLE BAPTIST CHURCH | $5,000 |
| YOUNG LIFE | $4,000 |
| WE SERVE FIRST FOUNDATION | $3,000 |
| PRADER-WILLI SYNDROME ASSOCIATION | $2,073 |
| PASSERI RECORDS LLC ATTN PETER DIMAGGIO | $1,000 |
| KISKI AREA YOUTH NETWORK ATTN BRIAN FISHER | $1,000 |
| BUSHY RUN AMERICAN LEGION | $200 |
| REDEEMER LUTHERAN SCHOOL | $100 |
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 (FY19–24, $750) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 87% 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 +38% since the first grant, against +2% for the ones you funded once.
24 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 16 since wound down; 7 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, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $37k 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
- DRDEL REY MINISTRIES6× · 2017–2025 · $18k · revenue +66%
- YLYOUNG LIFE7× · 2019–2025 · $8k · revenue +38%
- PSPRADER-WILLI SYNDROME ASSOCIATION3× · 2020–2025 · $4k · revenue +147%
Funded once
- DIDAYSPRING INTERNATIONALone grant, 2021 · $5k
- KKIELone grant, 2018 · $5k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $4k
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.
For more than 125 years, the mission of the johns hopkins hospital has been to lead the world in the diagnosis and treatment of disease and to train tomorrow's great physicians, nurses and scientists. above all, we aim to provide the…
Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.
Wipe out kids cancer offers comfort and hope to kids with cancer through support programs serving the entire family and funds innovative research leading to new discoveries and treatments in the fight against pediatric cancer. "support and…
The mission of dfci is to provide expert, compassionate, and equitable care to children, adults, and their families, while advancing the understanding, diagnosis, treatment, cure, and prevention of cancer and related diseases. we train new…
Fred hutch cancer center ("fred hutch") unites innovative research and compassionate care to prevent and eliminate cancer and infectious disease. continued on schedule o
The Nebraska Medical Center (TNMC)'s mission is to lead the world in transforming lives to create a healthy future for individuals and communities through premier educational programs, innovative research, and extraordinary patient care.
To improve the care and well being of our community, nationally and internationally, through innovative clinically relevant research that is consistent with the mission, vision and values of Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH).
Organization - kids beating cancer, inc., (kbc) is a nonprofit, nonstock florida corporation formed in 1992. kbc provides access to life-saving treatments through the science of cellular therapy and advancing pediatric innovative, novel,…
Tcgives was born in memory of kathleen k. schoemaker who lost her battle to pancreatic cancer in 2006. tcgives will raise money to promote progress in the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer in honor of kathleen. every year, more…
Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.
University of minnesota physicians serves as the integrated group practice for the university of minnesota medical school full-time faculty to provide the highest quality healthcare to patients and their families.university of minnesota…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is St Baldrick's Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Touchstone Cares. 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 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 12% of your grantees by number, and just 61% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 9% 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.
20 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. 20 of the 67 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.
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 Pittsburgh Foundation · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 The Andrew C Virostek 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.