· Public charity
The Digdeep Right to Water Project
Digdeep is a human rights organization working to ensure that every american has equitable access to water and sanitation forever.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 4 grants below total $300,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $424,328 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $124,328 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $280k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| YESS OF CHARLES COUNTY | $150,000 |
| ELEVATE ENERGY | $130,000 |
| SOL COMMUNICATIONS INC | $10,000 |
| SEEDS IN COMMON | $10,000 |
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 (FY21–23, $75k) land where the poverty rate runs at 21%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% 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 +48% since the first grant, against +7% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 3 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, 3% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $290k 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
- NTNAVAJO TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY3× · 2021–2023 · $219k · revenue +18%
- IWINTERNATIONAL WATER INITIATIVE FOR SANITATION AND HYGIENE INC2× · 2022–2023 · $33k · revenue +132% · 25% of their budget
- RFRED FEATHER DEVELOPMENT GROUP2× · 2021–2023 · $25k · revenue +48%
Funded once
- NTNavajo Tribal Utility Authorityone grant, 2021 · $237k
- SBST BONAVENTURE INDIAN MISSIONS & SCHOOLone grant, 2023 · $200k
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITYgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $200k · revenue +26%
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.
Sovereignty Rises is a 501c3 Native-led organization that supports new opportunities for cultural, health, and economic sovereignty in communities impacted by systems of oppression through community-driven systems change.
Our commitment to providing accessible clean water extends beyond the boundaries of countries, continents, and cultures. We are driven by a shared belief in the power of technology to transform lives, uplift communities, and create a more…
Sovereign Energy builds the individual and collective power of Southwest Pueblos and Tribes to lead the way toward a just, interdependent, and sustainable energy future.
The Cihuapactli Collective's purpose is to provide healing for urban Indigenous Peoples from the diaspora. This is done by sharing wisdom, connecting resources, revitalizing Traditional Knowledge, promoting and advocating for health &…
Planet Wise Solutions provides culturally appropriate co-created technologies with indigenous communities in the rainforest regions of Chiapas and Oaxaca Mexico. Our primary focus is the implantation of high efficiency clean cookstoves,…
Honor the earth is committed to protecting the lifeways and sovereignty of our indigenous relatives across mother earth. we do this by investing in our communities and a new generation of organizers through campaigns, research, training,…
To educate youth and indigenous people regarding environmental issues and their health.
The KiHa Mana Foundation is a non-profit organization with the mission to educate, preserve, restore and conserve the culture of Native Hawaiians and their resources.
Nia tero works alongside indigenous peoples to secure their guardianship of vital ecosystems. indigenous peoples are guardians of earth.(see schedule o)
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Water Well Trust Inc and the most unlike its peers is Honor Water Inc. 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 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 11% of your grantees by number, and just 13% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 6% 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.
25 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. 25 of the 36 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 NAVAJO TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds WAIORG INC ↗
- Who funds KABOOM INC ↗
- Who funds Elevate Energy ↗
- Who funds ST MICHAELS ASSOCIATION FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION INC ↗
- Who funds SOL Communications Inc ↗
- Who funds THE ACCOMPLIS COLLECTIVE INC ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL WATER INITIATIVE FOR SANITATION AND HYGIENE INC ↗
- Who funds REZ REFUGE MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds HONOR WATER INC ↗
- Who funds RED FEATHER DEVELOPMENT GROUP ↗
- Who funds PLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Hubitual ↗
- Who funds WATER WELL TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN SEED ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds CHINLE PLANTING HOPE ↗
- Who funds Colorado Native Outreach Project ↗
- Who funds HEALTHY ALASKA NATIVES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Fundamental Needs Inc ↗
- Who funds PUEBLO UNIDO CDC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTALISM THROUGH INSPIRATION & NONVIOLENT ACTION ↗
- Who funds WATER DROP ↗
- Who funds SEEDS OF HARMONY INC ↗
- Who funds BARBARA SCHNEIDER FOUNDATION ↗
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: Seventh Generation Fund for Indigenous Peoples Inc · Wells Fargo Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Network for Good · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Digdeep Right to Water Project 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.
- Johns Hopkins University — 12% 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.