· Private foundation
The Datck Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k20 grants · $27k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $98k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SANTUARY FARMS | $30,000 |
| COMMUNITY VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE | $17,500 |
| PHILLY HOUSE | $10,000 |
| LOWER MERIAN CONSERVANCY | $10,000 |
| DIVERSIFY DIETETICS | $10,000 |
| PHILABUNDANCE | $10,000 |
| JESSE TREE OF IDAHO | $10,000 |
| HOME OF THE SPARROW | $5,000 |
| FEEDING AMERICA | $2,500 |
| ST JOSEPH'S PREPARATORY HIGH SCHOOL | $2,500 |
| MANN CENTER FOR PERFORMING ARTS | $2,500 |
| SQUASH SMARTS INC | $2,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,100 |
| HABITAT FOR HUMANITY | $2,000 |
| NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
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 (FY20–25, $96k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 51% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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 +36% since the first grant, against +5% for the ones you funded once.
35 repeat relationships — 26 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 1 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, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k 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
- SBSUNDAY BREAKFAST RESCUE MISSION6× · 2020–2025 · $48k · revenue +59%
- TJTHE JESSE TREE OF IDAHO INC6× · 2020–2025 · $42k · revenue +63%
- LMLOWER MERION CONSERVANCY4× · 2020–2025 · $38k · revenue +7%
Funded once
- MCMERCY CORPS(TURKEY)one grant, 2023 · $5k
- MCMERCY CORPS(UKRAINE)one grant, 2022 · $5k
- STSAVE THE CHILDREN(UKRAINE)one grant, 2022 · $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 trustees of the university of pennsylvania (the "university") sees itself as having a public service mission. in such regard, the university aims to provide a rich and diverse educational environment for its students; to pioneer…
See schedule o.we are inspired by the ideals of our founder who, in 1896, emphasized respect for all people and ideas, who honored knowledge with practice, progress and the common good. our historical commitment to experiential learning…
Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…
As a diverse community of learners, we cultivate integrity, curiosity, connection and resilience.
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
Depauw university develops leaders the world needs through an uncommon commitment to the liberal arts. depauw's diverse and inclusive learning and living experience, distinctive in its rigorous intellectual engagement and its global and…
Gettysburg college is a residential, undergraduate college of the liberal arts and sciences.
Provides innovative education in a dynamic urban setting. dedicated to academic excellence and community engagement,we prepare students of diverse backgrounds with the knowledge, skill,and experience to lead meaningful lives as informed…
Provide a rigorous education and encourage pursuit of knowledge as preparation for life and work.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Philabundance and the most unlike its peers is Lower Merion Conservancy. 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 45 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% 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.
35 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. 35 of the 64 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 SUNDAY BREAKFAST RESCUE MISSION ↗
- Who funds THE JESSE TREE OF IDAHO INC ↗
- Who funds LOWER MERION CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Philabundance ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE ↗
- Who funds PENNSYLVANIA HOME OF THE SPARROW ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds DIVERSIFY DIETETICS INC ↗
- Who funds SQUASHSMARTS INC ↗
- Who funds University of Notre Dame du Lac ↗
- Who funds ACUMEN FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE REFLECT ORGANIZATION ↗
- Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds GUIDING EYES FOR THE BLIND INC ↗
- Who funds WHYY INC ↗
- Who funds THE BARNES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Prison Yoga Project Inc ↗
- Who funds BRIDLEWILD TRAILS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
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 Gordon Charter Foundation · The Philadelphia Foundation · Hamilton Family Foundation · W W Smith Charitable Trust · Henry Dolfinger 2 Trust Uw · The William Penn Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Chubb Charitable Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Verizon Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase 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 Datck 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.
- City Year Inc — 11% 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.