Skip to content
The Armstrong Family Foundation at a glance

· Public charity

The Armstrong Family Foundation

To perform the functions of, or to carry out the purposes of the arizona community foundation, an az nonprofit corporation, so long as the arizona community foundation, inc.

$407k
Granted FY2019
7
Grants FY2019
1
States reached
$166k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of The Armstrong Family Foundation’s FY2021 grant dollars went to Arizona Community Foundation, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2021 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2019, the last year The Armstrong Family Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $402k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

12
’17
13
’18
6
’19
0
’20
0
’21

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2021.

Philanthropy$5.7MHuman Services$772kYouth Development$443kEducation$381kCommunity Improvement$287kHealth$65kEnvironment$40kArts & Culture$30kOther$0
02FY2019 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2019

  • $10k–50k5 grants · $112k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $291k
$26,806
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RANCHO FELIZ CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC$165,500
SUPPORT MY CLUB$125,000
SEED SPOT$40,000
BLOOM365$26,806
FEEDING MATTERS INC$25,000
RESILIENTME INC$10,000
STEP STUDENT EXPEDITION PROGRAM$10,000
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 (FY17–19, $1.5M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Support My Club: $258k → 11%SUPPORT MY CLUB: $185k → 11%SUPPORT MY CLUB: $125k → 11%RANCHO FELIZ CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC: $642k → 11%RANCHO FELIZ CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC: $166k → 11%RANCHO FELIZ Supporting FOUNDATION INC: $130k → 11%Hospice of the Valley: $10k → 11%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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 8 repeat orgs$250k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2019, 2 since wound down. Read against FY2019, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
11

Total granted

$1.7M
$250k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-12%
+55%

Still filing today

75%
73%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2019, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19
EducationHuman ServicesArts & CultureHealthPhilanthropyInternationalOther
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

  • RF
    RANCHO FELIZ CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $937k · revenue +469% · 53% of their budget
  • BI
    BLOOM365 INC
    2× · 2018–2019 · $57k · revenue +130%
  • SS
    STEP STUDENT EXPEDITION PROGRAM INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $30k · revenue +81%

Funded once

  • VM
    VILLA MONTESSORI INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $90k · revenue +36%
  • TS
    THE SALVATION ARMY
    one grant, 2018 · $50k
  • SA
    SOUNDS ACADEMYgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue +400%
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
Ball Charter Schools (Val Vista)

Arizona ball charter schools provides a personalized education to all students emphasizing comprehensive academic excellence in a safe, nurturing environment through partnering parents, students and staff.

Education
2
Accelerated Elementary and Secondary Schools

Operation of a private school

Education
3
Arizona Leads

We facilitate effective, bipartisan partnerships needed to achieve educational excellence and scale success across arizona's public schools - both district and charter.

Education
4
International School of Arizona

Our mission is to provide a progressive international education and advanced multilingual academics in a safe, diverse, and nurturing environment. our innovative and individualized approach to learning prepares highly motivated students…

Education
5
Ball Charter Schools(Dobson)

Arizona ball charter schools provides a personalized education to all students emphasizing comprehensive academic excellence in a safe, nurturing environment through partnering parents, students and staff.

Education
6
New Learning Ventures Inc

New learning ventures, inc. is rethinking learning and fostering innovation to positively impact the future of our state. we envision a thriving arizona with a talented and competitive workforce and healthy communities generated from…

Education
7
Ball Charter Schools (Hearn)

Arizona ball charter schools provides a personalized education to all students emphasizing comprehensive academic excellence in a safe, nurturing environment through partnering parents, students and staff.

Education
8
Vista Charter Public Schools Inc

At vista, students master core subjects through the power of applying knowledge in a real-world context. in addition to rigorous academics, our schools focus on increased proficiency in crucial areas such as critical thinking, problem…

Education
9
Montessori Academy Inc

Charter school

Education
10
Montessori Day Public Schools Chartered

Montessori based school with the purpose to provide quality education to students in grades kindergarten through 8th. operates as a charter school under a contract with the arizona state board for charter schools.

Education
11
The Paideia Academies Inc

To utilize a family centric model to enlist the support of families in the education and upbringing of the whole child- academic & intellectual, recreational & cultural, character & leadership, emotional, physical & mental health- to…

Education
12
Arizona School Administrators Inc

To promote and support educational excellence in educational leadership

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Step Student Expedition Program Inc; the most unlike its peers is Expect More Arizona. 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

18 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. 18 of the 21 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/18
Grantees still filing
11/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ARIZONA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $5,688,731 · PhilanthropyARIZONA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION+1 more: $20,000 · PhilanthropyRANCHO FELIZ CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC: $937,000 · Human ServicesRANCHO FELIZ CHARITABL…SUPPORT MY CLUB: $568,000 · Human ServicesSUPPORT MY CLUB+1 more: $10,000 · Human ServicesVILLA MONTESSORI INC: $90,000 · EducationSTEP STUDENT EXPEDITION PROGRAM INC: $30,000 · EducationEXPECT MORE ARIZONA: $20,000 · EducationDENVER MONTESSORI SOCIETY: $10,000 · EducationVISTA COLLEGE PREPARATORY INC: $10,000 · EducationSEED SPOT: $135,000 · Community ImprovementTHE SALVATION ARMY: $50,000 · OtherRESILIENTME INC: $40,000 · OtherPHOENIX COLLEGIATE ACADEMY INC: $15,000 · OtherSOUNDS ACADEMY: $25,000 · OtherTHE TIA FOUNDATION INC: $15,000 · OtherCELEBRATE EDU: $10,000 · Other+2 more: $10,000 · OtherBLOOM365 INC: $56,806 · Crime & LegalFEEDING MATTERS INC: $50,000 · Health
Philanthropy$5,708,731Human Services$1,515,000Education$160,000Community Improvement$135,000Other$165,000Crime & Legal$56,806Health$50,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetARIZONA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $5,688,731 over 3y, 5.0% of budgetRANCHO FELIZ CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC: $937,000 over 3y, 53% of budgetSUPPORT MY CLUB: $568,000 over 3y, 35% of budgetSEED SPOT: $135,000 over 2y, 7.3% of budgetVILLA MONTESSORI INC: $90,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetBLOOM365 INC: $56,806 over 2y, 7.4% of budgetFEEDING MATTERS INC: $50,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetSTEP STUDENT EXPEDITION PROGRAM INC: $30,000 over 3y, 2.1% of budgetSOUNDS ACADEMY: $25,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetEXPECT MORE ARIZONA: $20,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetSOCIAL VENTURE PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL: $20,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetPHOENIX COLLEGIATE ACADEMY INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE TIA FOUNDATION INC: $15,000 over 2y, 4.2% of budgetVISTA COLLEGE PREPARATORY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCELEBRATE EDU: $10,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetHospice of the Valley: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Arizona Community Fou…The Kiita FoundationThunderbirds CharitiesBurton Family Foundat…Ingebritson Family Fo…The Jack Ingebritson …The Pakis Family Foun…Virginia G Piper Char…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…
Arizona Community FoundationAZ27.6× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Arizona Community Foundation · The Kiita Foundation · Thunderbirds Charities · Burton Family Foundation · Ingebritson Family Foundation · The Jack Ingebritson Foundation Inc · The Pakis Family Foundation · Virginia G Piper Charitable Trust · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program

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 The Armstrong Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Armstrong Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Armstrong Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Armstrong Family 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.

    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 21 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Armstrong Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home