How much did THE LARCH FOUNDATION grant in FY2024?

Arts & Culture$3.4MHealth$516kHuman Services$146kPhilanthropy$40kEducation$36kInternational$31kPublic Benefit$25kAnimals$11kCivil Rights$10kOther$639k

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

israel

2019

—

2020

—

2021

—

2022

—

2023

—

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

03FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k1 grant · $1k
$10k–50k5 grants · $108k
$50k–250k2 grants · $112k
$250k+1 grant · $275k

$25,000

Median grant

States reached

$1.8M

Total assets

Largest grants

UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM$275,000
AUGUSTA LEVY LEARNING CENTER$62,000
PAN-MASS CHALLENGE$50,000
SNELL FOUNDATION$25,000
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF SAR EL$25,000
MERIT SPREAD FOUNDATION$22,250
ISRAEL ON CAMPUS COALITION$18,000
CHARLES E MILLER FOUNDATION$18,000
WALS FOUNDATION$1,000

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 (FY18–22, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7% — the area typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-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.

$4.4M · 11 repeat orgs$499k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$4.4M

$390k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+16%

+42%

Still filing today

64%

44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $108k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Arts & CultureEducationHuman ServicesEnvironmentInternationalHealthOther

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

US
UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM
8× · 2017–2024 · $3.3M · revenue +16%
AL
AUGUSTA LEVY LEARNING CENTER
8× · 2017–2024 · $514k · revenue +137%
FO
FRIENDS OF AUSCHWITZ-BIRKENAU FOUNDATION
2× · 2017–2019 · $150k · revenue +380%

Funded once

FC
FLORENCE CNTY DIST THREE EDUCATION FOUNDATION
one grant, 2021 · $175k
EC
EAST CAROLINA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION
one grant, 2020 · $28k
MA
MOUNTAINEER AUTISM PROJECT
one grant, 2017 · $25k

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.

Yale University

To improve the world through research, scholarship, education, preservation, and practice.

Education

New York University

Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes.

Education

The Wetlands Institute

The mission of the wetlands institute is to promote appreciation, understanding and stewardship of wetland and coastal ecosystems through programs in research, conservation and education.

—

University of Maine Foundation

Fundraising and endowment management for the benefit of the University of Maine

Education

Connecticut Trust for Historic

Interacts with other groups, individuals and organizations to encourage, advocate and facilitate historical preservation throughout connecticut.

Arts & Culture

University of Hartford

The university provides a learning environment in which students may transform themselves intellectually, personally and socially.

Education

New York Law School

The mission of new york law school is to provide its students with knowledge, skill (see schedule o) and ethical values needed for a career in law.

Education

Western New England University

See Schedule O Statement for Part III, Line 1 that also applies to Part I, Line 1

Education

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

The howard hughes medical institute is a philanthropy that serves society through the direct conduct of biomedical research and support for programs in science education.

Health

Westminster University

Offer undergraduate and graduate degrees in liberal arts and professional programs.

Education

Trustees of Dartmouth College

Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.

Education

Schmidt Ocean Institute

Science & Tech

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Oglebay Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Waynflete School. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 30 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 5% lost their exemption, against 10% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

2/38

the rest of the field

10%

1,356/12,963

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

34 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)

32/34

Grantees still filing

23/34

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Arts & Culture$3,442,300Other$685,450Health$516,090Human Services$145,500Philanthropy$40,250Education$35,500International$30,500

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.

Maine Community Foundation IncME21.6× affinity9 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Maine Community Foundation Inc · Elmina B Sewall Foundation · Onion Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust 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 organisation THE LARCH 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

3get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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: SPEAKING UP FOR US.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

medium risk

~6 months of operating runway; revenue held over 7 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 204595359 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 SPEAKING UP FOR US, 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

WatchFinancial stability— Roughly 6 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue held over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 25% of their budget — diversified.
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 Larch Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Larch 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 LARCH 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

34 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Larch Foundation?

More from the funding graph

THE LARCH 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

34 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Larch Foundation?

More from the funding graph