· Private foundation
The Gildea Foundation Inc
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 FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION | $30,000 |
| ASTRONAUT SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION | $30,000 |
| MUW FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
| CAPE ELEUTHERA FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE LAND TRUST | $10,000 |
| NEW YORK BOTANICAL GARDEN | $10,000 |
| ONE ELEUTHERA FOUNDATION OF THE US | $10,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF MUSTANGS & BURROS | $10,000 |
| COLUMBUS CIVIC ARTS COUNCIL INC | $10,000 |
| BAHAMAS PLASTIC MOVEMENT | $10,000 |
| SOUTH CAROLINA COASTAL CONSERVATION LEAGUE | $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 (FY19–24, $43k) land where the poverty rate runs at 24%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 10% of The Gildea Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
19 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
CAPE ELEUTHERA FOUNDATION INC5× · 2017–2025 · $90k · revenue +216%
ASTRONAUT SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION INC7× · 2018–2025 · $76k · revenue +16%- SCSouth Carolina Coastal Conservation League Inc9× · 2017–2025 · $71k · revenue +177%
Funded once
- MRMARKETING RESEARCH EDUCATION FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2024 · $20k · revenue 0%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $15k
- RTRAINFOREST TRUSTgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +78%
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.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.
Our mission is to act to conserve threatened species and ecosystems worldwide, choosing solutions that are sustainable, based on sound science and take into account human needs.
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
In 2024, biscayne bay waterkeeper (d/b/a miami waterkeeper) built on our reputation by navigating challenges, seizing opportunities, and continuing our unwavering commitment to safeguarding our precious waterways and finding local…
Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.
The Natura Bolivia Foundation is dedicated to implementing, and evaluating the impact of conservation and development programs, with a focus on watershed conservation, protected areas, and incentive based conservation in Bolivia. We work…
The mission of the foundation is to restore and protect america's everglades through its three programmatic pillars: science, advocacy and education. (continued on schedule o)
Increase societal understanding of the earth system through scientific research and education.
The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Astronaut Scholarship Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Foundation for Natural Health. 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 28 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) — 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 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.
27 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. 27 of the 37 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 INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF MUSTANGS AND BURROS ↗
- Who funds CAPE ELEUTHERA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds ASTRONAUT SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds South Carolina Coastal Conservation League Inc ↗
- Who funds FRESH FUTURE FARM INC ↗
- Who funds OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds South Carolina Aquarium ↗
- Who funds Mississippi State University Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds INFINITY SCIENCE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds ONE ELEUTHERA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK BOTANICAL GARDEN ↗
- Who funds Bahamas Plastic Movement Inc ↗
- Who funds COLORADO WOLF AND WILDLIFE CENTER ↗
- Who funds MARKETING RESEARCH EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CREATE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RETRIEVING FREEDOM INC ↗
- Who funds RAINFOREST TRUST ↗
- Who funds TAMPA BAY WATERKEEPER INC ↗
- Who funds Amazon Watch Inc ↗
- Who funds ART FOR ALL PEOPLE INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds Tennessee WilliamsNew Orleans Literary Festival ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds NATURE COLLECTIVE ↗
- Who funds WOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds THE FOUNDATION FOR NATURAL HEALTH ↗
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: Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Gildea Foundation Inc 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.
- Tampa Bay Waterkeeper Inc — 0% 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 Gildea Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to The Gildea Foundation Inc 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.