· Private foundation
The Beach Foundation
Its FY2024 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 FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k32 grants · $76k
- $10k–50k19 grants · $315k
- $50k–250k6 grants · $400k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ATLAS NETWORK | $100,000 |
| COMMONWEATLH FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| FOUNDATION FOR ECONOMIC EDUCATION | $50,000 |
| FOUNDATION FOR GOVT ACCOUNTABILITY | $50,000 |
| STUDENTS FOR LIBERTY | $50,000 |
| REASON FOUNDATION | $50,000 |
| EMBER CLUB | $25,000 |
| REALCLEAR FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| RODEO AUSTIN | $25,000 |
| FAIRNESS CENTER | $25,000 |
| COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE | $25,000 |
| INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE | $20,000 |
| PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
| CATO INSTITUTE | $20,000 |
| FREEDOM FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
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 (FY20–24, $40k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
63 repeat relationships — 45 still active in FY2024, 18 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $111k 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
- TRTHE REASON FOUNDATION5× · 2020–2024 · $305k · revenue +41%
- SFSTUDENTS FOR LIBERTY INC5× · 2020–2024 · $245k · revenue +34%
- FFFoundation for Economic Education Inc5× · 2020–2024 · $135k · revenue +5%
Funded once
- PUPRAGER UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $5k · revenue +112%
- SESEEKING EDUCATION EXCELLENCEgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $5k · revenue ×1,165
- GFGMU FOUND (GEORGE MASON)one grant, 2020 · $5k
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.
The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
Preservation of civil liberties through litigation and public education.
To provide accurate, objective information and analysis on international strategic issues for legislators, diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business leaders, economists, the military, defense commentators, journalists,…
Using legal advocacy to make advances in science and technology safer for people and the planet.
The nonpartisan campaign legal center advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every american's rights to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic…
The r street institute is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, public-policy research organization ("think tank"). our mission is to engage in policy research and outreach to promote free markets and limited, effective government. (continued on…
To educate the public on constitutional issues and public policy matters. We are dedicated to the principles of individual liberty, peace through strength, limited government, free enterprise, and the values embodied in the Declaration of…
Support public interest litigators by leveraging resources and creating opportunities for collaboration to advance freedom under the rule of law.
The center for american progress (cap) is an independent nonpartisan policy institute that is dedicated to improving the lives of all americans through bold, progressive ideas, as well as strong leadership and concerted action. our aim is…
We provide exemplary interdisciplinary programs for a community of scholar-practitioners within a distributed learning model grounded in student-driven inquiry and leading to enhanced knowledge.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Freedomworks Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Breakthrough T1D. 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 34 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) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
56 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 56 of the 86 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.
- Who funds THE REASON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds STUDENTS FOR LIBERTY INC ↗
- Who funds Foundation for Economic Education Inc ↗
- Who funds COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds CATO INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Pacific Legal Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY FOR LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY STUDIES ↗
- Who funds STATE POLICY NETWORK ↗
- Who funds THE FAIRNESS CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds GRANITE STATE ADAPTIVE ↗
- Who funds EdChoice Inc ↗
- Who funds Loon Preservation Committee ↗
- Who funds THE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds THIRD OPTION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FREEDOMWORKS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds REAL CLEAR FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Young Voices ↗
- Who funds RODEO AUSTIN ↗
- Who funds TURNING POINT USA INC ↗
- Who funds SQUAM LAKES NATURAL SCIENCE CENTER ↗
- Who funds JUDICIAL WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds Leadership Institute ↗
- Who funds Americans for Prosperity Foundation ↗
- Who funds YOUNG AMERICANS FOR LIBERTY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ILLINOIS POLICY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds FREE TO CHOOSE NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds SQUAM LAKES ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds SQUAM LAKES CONSERVATION SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL TAXPAYERS UNION ↗
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 Dunn Foundation · Donors Trust Inc · John William Pope Foundation · Bradley Impact Fund Inc · Lovett-Woodsum Foundation Inc · Sarah Scaife Foundation Incorporated · New Hampshire Charitable Foundation · Charles Koch Foundation · The Armstrong Foundation · Charles Koch Institute · Triad Foundation Inc · The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation 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 The Beach 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.
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Naples Botanical Garden Inc — 3% 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 The Beach Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Beach 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.