How much does The Links Foundation Incorporated give?

The Links Foundation Incorporated reported 113 itemized grants totaling $7,566,078, out of $8,046,129 in total grant expense reported on the return in its FY2024 IRS filing. It funded between 79 and 122 organizations a year over FY2017 to FY2023.

What does The Links Foundation Incorporated fund?

By grant dollars over FY2017 to FY2024, its largest causes are Education (93%), Health (3%), Membership Benefit (2%).

Who are The Links Foundation Incorporated's largest grantees?

By total granted over FY2017 to FY2024: The Links Incorporated Central Area ($1.4M), TRINITY (TX) Chapter of the LINKS INCORPORATED ($1.1M), St Jude Children's Research Hospital Inc ($1.0M).

Does The Links Foundation Incorporated fund new organizations?

In FY2023, 4% of the organizations it funded were first-time grantees.

Which funders back the same organizations as The Links Foundation Incorporated?

Its strongest co-funders, measured against what their size predicts, include Esther Gordy Bullock Edwards Foundation.

Where is The Links Foundation Incorporated based?

The Links Foundation Incorporated is based in DC.

The Links Foundation Incorporated

The Links Foundation Incorporated at a glance Also receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

The Links Foundation Incorporated

Promoting and engaging in educational, civic and intercultural activities in order to enrich the lives of members of the larger community.

$8.0M

Granted FY2024still arriving

113

Grants FY2024still arriving

States reached

$1.1M

Largest

01What it funds

01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Education$34MHealth$1.0MMembership Benefit$623kPublic Benefit$318kYouth Development$242kCommunity Improvement$151kArts & Culture$116kHuman Services$90kOther$0

02FY2024 · 113 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured

The 113 grants below total $7,566,078, the rows itemized in this filing. The $8,046,129 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $480,051 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k11 grants · $79k
$10k–50k61 grants · $1.6M
$50k–250k37 grants · $3.9M
$250k+4 grants · $2.1M

$35,000

Median grant

States reached

$32M

Total assets

Largest grants
Recipient	Amount
CENTRAL AREA	$1,101,462
CHICAGO CHAPTER	$365,716
TRINITY CHAPTER	$309,000
OAKLAND BAY AREA CHAPTER	$285,422
WESTERN AREA	$230,800
MEMPHIS CHAPTER	$217,222
SOUTHERN AREA	$199,848
DURHAM CHAPTER	$197,073
DALLAS CHAPTER	$177,124
PLANO NORTH MOTROPLEX CHAPTER	$155,900
ARLINGTON (VA) CHAPTER	$146,287
CROWN JEWELS CHAPTER	$140,000
HARBOR CITY CHAPTER	$139,921
WEST PALM BEACH CHAPTER	$136,532
SAN DIEGO CHAPTER	$131,600

02The need

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY19–22, $173k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

How this is measured

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.

Which US states its grants reach

How this is measured

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.

03Its grantees

repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.

$34M · 175 repeat orgs$2.0M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +55% since the first grant, against +44% for those funded once.

175 repeat relationships: 107 still active in FY2024, 68 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

175

Total granted

$34M

$1.9M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+55%

+44%

Still filing today

87%

53%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $122k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Community ImprovementMembership BenefitArts & CultureHealthHuman ServicesAnimalsOther

How this is measured

First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

TL
THE LINKS INCORPORATED CENTRAL AREA
7× · 2017–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +203% · 48% of their budget
T(
TRINITY (TX) Chapter of the LINKS INCORPORATED
9× · 2017–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +337% · 99% of their budget
SA
SOUTHERN AREA OF THE LINKS INCORPORATED
6× · 2017–2024 · $965k · revenue +788% · 32% of their budget

Funded once

ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INCgraduated
one grant, 2019 · $1.0M · revenue +99%
TL
The Links Incoporated Columbus Chaptergraduated
2× · 2019–2025 · $216k · revenue ×37
LI
LINKS INC
one grant, 2018 · $81k

How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

Links Inc the Missouri City Chapter of the Links Inc

Not-for-profit committed to serving the less-fortunate

—

Jackson Ms Chapter of the Links Inc

Promote and engage in educational, civic, and intercultural activities throughout the Jackson, MS Metropolitan Area

—

The Wichita Chapter of Links Inc

Enriching, sustaining and ensuring the identities, culture and economic survival of african americans and persons of african ancestry.

—

The Link Foundation

—

Houston (Tx) Chapter of the Links Inc

Community service

—

Link Foundation

Philanthropy

The Links Incorporated South Jersey Chapter

Chapter of National Volounteer Service Organization

—

The Golden Triangle Chapter of the Links Inc

Community services

—

Prince George's County (Md) Chapter of the Links Incorporated

The mission of the Prince George's County (MD) Chapter of The Links, Incorporated, a service organization of friends, is to strengthen the bonds of friendship among its members and to enhance the quality of life, through programs and…

—

Links Inc Greater Seattle Chapter

A volunteer service organization to enhance the quality of life in the community at large focusing on african americans and african descents.

—

The Link Foundation Co Chemung Canal Trust Company

—

The Links Incorporated Western Area

Regional civic association organization and a member of the international non-profit organization, The Links, Incorporated. It is committed to enriching, sustaining and ensuring the culture and economic survival of African Americans and…

—

How this is measured

The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Links Incorporated - Suffolk (Va) Chapter; the most unlike its peers is St Jude Children's Research Hospital Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

04the grantee network

184 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 184 of the 215 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

121

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

180/184

Grantees still filing

123/184

Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Other$34,406,337Health$1,000,000Community Improvement$379,262Human Services$173,483Philanthropy$133,839Youth Development$70,130Membership Benefit$61,636

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Esther Gordy Bullock Edwards FoundationMI13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Esther Gordy Bullock Edwards Foundation

How this is measured

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Links Foundation Incorporated funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Links Foundation Incorporated. Bigger dots raise more.

2025

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

30get no government money at all

5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%

typical government reliance, FY20–25

How this is measured

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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

Play a game based on Links’ filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions

grants reported with no recipient in the public record

The regranting layer

51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer

The DAF merry-go-round

$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds

The endowment market

who holds foundation money, and what just moved

The camps

funders cluster by geography, not ideology

By state

where grant money is based, and what stays home