How much did The Charles and Mary Crossed Foundation grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 66% of The Charles and Mary Crossed Foundation’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

2018

—

2019

—

2020

—

2021

pro-life educationvalues educationtraditional valuescatholicresearchreliefpregnancy

2022

pro-life educationhospice carepreservationchild welfarepregnancycare womenrelief

2023

pro-life educationpregnancyfocuscare womenrelief

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

03FY2024 · 115 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k94 grants · $160k
$10k–50k12 grants · $193k
$50k–250k8 grants · $681k
$250k+1 grant · $350k

$1,000

Median grant

States reached

$18M

Total assets

Largest grants

The Thomas More Society$350,000
Americans United for Life$130,000
Feminists Choosing Life of NY$115,000
Students for Life of America$113,330
Abigail Adams Institute$83,050
Rehumanize International$80,000
Hope Hall School$55,000
Global Centurion$55,000
Progressive AntiAbortion Uprising$50,000
Catholic Ministries Appeal$34,000
Charlotte Lozier Institute$25,000
DFLA Educational Fund$25,000
Our Lady of Mercy High School$22,800
Human Life Review$12,800
Susan B Anthony Birthplace$12,642

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 (FY21–24, $193k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 9%. 100% 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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$14M · 91 repeat orgs$1.5M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +85% since the first grant, against +45% for the ones you funded once.

91 repeat relationships — 66 still active in FY2024, 25 since wound down; 49 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

105

Total granted

$14M

$1.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+85%

+45%

Still filing today

42%

23%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $54k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationCivil RightsHuman ServicesHealthReligionInternationalOther

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

AU
Americans United for Life
4× · 2021–2024 · $1.5M · revenue +36% · 28% of their budget
TT
The Thomas More Society
3× · 2022–2024 · $1.4M · revenue +153%
SF
Students for Life of America
4× · 2021–2024 · $577k · revenue +176%

Funded once

ST
St Thomas More Society
2× · 2021–2022 · $960k
SB
S B Anthony List Educational Fund
4× · 2021–2024 · $200k
SO
Station of the Cross
2× · 2021–2022 · $70k

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.

Human Life Services Inc

Human Life Services is a life affirming Christ-centered pregnancy care organization serving York through medical services, peer counseling, education and community referrals.

Civil Rights

Pro-Life Action Ministries Inc

Pro-Life Action Ministries, Inc. is an interdenominational Christian organization dedicated to publicly defending the sanctity of human life & saving lives from abortion, infanticide & euthanasia through peaceful direct-action & education…

—

National Committee for a Human Life

Disseminate information to secure the enactment of a human life amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

—

Indiana Right to Life Incorporated

To educate the public about abortion

—

Life Matters Worldwide

Life Matters Worldwide encourages, equips and strengthens pregnancy care workers so they can continue to provide life-affirming services.

Civil Rights

Life Advancement Group

To rescue lives from the destruction of abortion through innovative marketing, strategy, and technology solutions.

—

40 Days for Life

40 Days for Life focuses on education, equipping, and training local communities to pray and fast, do community outreach, and hold peaceful vigils to offer loving alternatives to women who are pregnant.

Education

Pro-Life Wisconsin Inc

Defend the right to life of all citizens of our state, whether born or preborn, young, old, disabled, or terminally ill. we affirm that the right to life exists at the moment of fertilization and extends until natural death.

—

Project Defending Life Inc

We are committed to defending the sacredness of human life from conception to natural death, focused specifically on ending abortion.

Civil Rights

Passionlife Ministries Inc

Passionlife ministries is a global missions initiative to spread the gospel of life and expand the pregnancy help movement among nations plagued by abortion, infanticide and gendercide.

Religion

Life Choice Crisis Pregnancy Center Inc

Pregnancy resource center exists to prevent abortions and present eternal truth.

Health

L I F E Ministries Inc

Our mission is to affirm life through evangelism, education, counseling and practical assistance.

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Villa of Hope and the most unlike its peers is Roberts Wesleyan University. 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 27 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 10% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 8% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/89

the rest of the field

10,118/120,671

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

78 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)

78/78

Grantees still filing

66/78

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$10,273,810Civil Rights$2,635,731Crime & Legal$1,350,500Education$478,815International$286,862Human Services$209,475Health$106,866

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.

Rochester Area Community FoundationNY30× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Rochester Area Community Foundation · Esl Charitable Foundation · United Way of Greater Rochester And · Paychex Charitable Foundation Inc · Rochester Area Community Foundation · Max and Marian Farash Charitable · Charles J & Burton S August Family · Greater Rochester Health Foundation · JM McDonald Foundation Inc · Marie C and Joseph C Wilson · William & Sheila Konar Foundation · Daisy Marquis Jones 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 The Charles and Mary Crossed 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.

2025

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

1get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%

typical government reliance, FY20–25

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: Rehumanize International.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

low risk

6 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up +56% since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 455151491 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 Rehumanize International, 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 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 73% 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 The Charles and Mary Crossed Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Charles and Mary Crossed Foundation 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.

The Charles and Mary Crossed Foundation

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

78 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Charles and Mary Crossed Foundation?

More from the funding graph

The Charles and Mary Crossed Foundation

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

78 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Charles and Mary Crossed Foundation?

More from the funding graph