Loading…
· Public charity
THE LOVEALL FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN
$163k
Granted FY2024
5
Grants
2
Communities
$10k
Largest
01What you fund
0174% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.
Human Services$231kInternational$70kRecreation & Sports$42kYouth Development$27kEducation$11kAnimals$6kOther$133k
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
—
2019
—
2020
—
2021
rideyoungcovenantdisabilitiesparentshomelessnesstrafficking
2022
covenantyounghomelessnesstraffickingmeetdrop-innow
2023
make
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2024 · 5 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k3 grants · $19k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
$7,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$5.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
- CHILD ADVOCATES OF AUBURN$10,000
- NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH ASSOCIATION$10,000
- BERGEN CATHOLIC GOLF OUTING$7,500
- HEARTS LANDING RANCH$6,000
- STANFORD SIERRA YOUTH & FAMILIES$5,210
02The need
04
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 (FY18–24, $231k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11% — the area typically sits at 10%. 39% 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.
55%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$284k · 8 repeat orgs$235k to everyone else
8 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
8
8
Total granted
$284k
$212k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+62%
+72%
Still filing today
88%
63%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 39% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $24k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
Human ServicesRecreation & SportsInternationalYouth DevelopmentEducationAnimalsOther
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
- NYNEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH ASSOCIATION INC5× · 2018–2022 · $70k · revenue +62%
BEST BUDDIES OF MASSACHUSETTS2× · 2017–2019 · $70k · revenue +81%- SPSUNBURST PROJECTS5× · 2019–2023 · $41k · revenue +174%
Funded once
- SPSOUTH PACIFIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $110k · revenue +94%
- BABOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF CHICAGOone grant, 2017 · $27k · revenue +17%
- DMDE MARILLAC ACADEMYone grant, 2018 · $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.
1
Notmykid
Notmykid's mission is to ensure every kid thrives by inspiring positive life choices.
Human Services
2
Global Fund for Children
To advance the rights and opportunities of children and youth worldwide.
Arts & Culture
3
The Children's Cancer Cause Inc
The mission of children's cancer cause is to champion policies and programs that improve the lives of children with cancer and survivors.
Health
4
Children's Council of San Francisco
Since 1974, Children's Council has been at the heart of early care and education in San Francisco.
Human Services
5
Connectability
ConnectAbility's mission is to empower those with life altering disabilities and their caregivers to reach their fullest potential.
Human Services
6
Cincinnati Youth Collaborative
Cincinnati Youth Collaborative ("CYC") empowers young people to overcome barriers and excel in education, career, and life.
Education
7
Project Commotion
Project Commotion is a California 501(c)3 nonprofit. Its mission is to foster healthy development in children of all abilities through purposeful movement, play, and family and community relationships.
Health
8
Partnership for Children
To increase access to medical care for children with serious illnesses and support their families.
Human Services
9
Aspire of Illinois
Aspire's mission is to support the successes of people with developmental disabilities, strengthen their families and build embracing communities.
Human Services
10
New Pathways for Youth
Transforming the lives of youth by providing the support, stability, and skills they need to flourish in the community and in their families.
Crime & Legal
11
Special Equestrians Inc
Our Vision: A community where the impossible becomes possible. Our mission: To enrich the lives of people with physical, cognitive or emotional challenges through a relationship with a horse.
Human Services
12
Parents & Friends Inc
To provide opportunities for people with developmental challenges and similar needs.
Human Services
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Covenant House and the most unlike its peers is Ride to Walk Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network
13 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
13/13
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Human Services$231,344Other$132,810International$70,000Recreation & Sports$42,149Youth Development$27,000Education$10,513Animals$6,000
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 SOUTH PACIFIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds BEST BUDDIES OF MASSACHUSETTS ↗
- Who funds SUNBURST PROJECTS ↗
- Who funds FAIRYTALE TOWN INC ↗
- Who funds CHILD ADVOCATES OF PLACER COUNTY ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds COVENANT HOUSE ↗
- Who funds AIM HIGH FOR HIGH SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds RIDE TO WALK INC ↗
- Who funds HEARTS LANDING RANCH ↗
- Who funds STEPHEN J WAMPLER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CASA OF SACRAMENTO ↗
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.
American Online Giving Foundation IncDE6.4× affinity6 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: American Online Giving 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 organisation THE LOVEALL FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN 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
- Best Buddies International Inc — 4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
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: SOUTH PACIFIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATION.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
low risk
~54 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 5 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
5 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up +94% since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 800667446 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 SOUTH PACIFIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATION, 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
- On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 54 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 9% 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 Loveall Foundation for Children?
Find your warmest path to The Loveall Foundation for Children 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.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines