Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Lum Davis Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$45k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What you fund
0194% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202024.

Human Services$70kRecreation & Sports$29kHealth$20kYouth Development$15kCrime & Legal$10kInternational$5kFood & Nutrition$5kOther$0
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$463k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MOMS LOVE FOREVER$25,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
KYLES FAMILY FOUNDATION$10,000
02The need
03

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 (FY22–23, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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.

area typical 11%PRESENT NOW: $9k → 14%PRESENT NOW: $1k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein 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 — 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.

63%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$102k · 4 repeat orgs$61k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +28% since the first grant, against +17% for the ones you funded once.

4 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
6

Total granted

$102k
$41k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
+17%

Still filing today

75%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 56% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
Youth DevelopmentHealthCivil RightsPhilanthropyHuman ServicesFood & NutritionOther

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

  • ML
    MOMS LOVE FOREVER
    2× · 2023–2024 · $60k
  • RD
    ROD DEDEAUX FOUNDATION
    2× · 2022–2023 · $29k
  • PN
    PRESENT NOW
    2× · 2022–2023 · $10k · revenue -86%

Funded once

  • TH
    THE HAROLD AND CAROLE PUMP FOUNDATION (FKA THE HAROLD PUMP FOUNDATION)
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -14%
  • HK
    HOOMAU KE OLA
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue 0%
  • TL
    THE LAW FIRM FOR NON PROFIT
    one grant, 2022 · $10k

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
Kingdom Pillars

Empowering women to wholeness and self-worth with providing a safe haven.

Public Benefit
2
The Deangelo Williams Foundation
3
The Maue Kay Foundation
Philanthropy
4
Women Power Love Foundation

Womens inpowerment

Arts & Culture
5
Wade Family Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Taylor Hooton Foundation for Fighting Steroid Abuse

Educate the general population of the dangers of steroid abuse for the purpose of minimizing the abuse of this drug by adolescents and young adults.

Health
7
The Pink Journey Foundation
Health
8
The Wana Brands Foundation
Philanthropy
9
Foundation for Women At Risk

Helping women and children at risk of domestic abuse

Human Services
10
Families in Transition

The mission of families in transition is to empower individuals to break the cycle of domestic violence by providing safety, shelter, support services, public education, social and legal advocacy

Human Services
11
The Deborah Rose Foundation
Philanthropy
12
Direct Action for Women Now World-Wide Inc Formerly Indias Daughters Inc
Philanthropy

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Kyles Family Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Hoomau Ke Ola. 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

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 12 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

MOMS LOVE FOREVER — $60,000 · OtherMOMS LOVE FOREVERTHE LAW FIRM FOR NON PROFIT — $10,000 · OtherTHE LAW FIRM FOR NON PROFITIndividual grant recipient — $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+1 more — $936 · OtherROD DEDEAUX FOUNDATION — $28,500 · PhilanthropyROD DEDEAUX FOUNDAT…THE HAROLD AND CAROLE PUMP FOUNDATION (FKA THE HAROLD PUMP FOUNDATION) — $10,000 · HealthTHE HAROLD AN…HOOMAU KE OLA — $10,000 · HealthHOOMAU KE OLAKyles Family Foundation — $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentKyles Fami…Girls Embracing Mothers Inc — $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentGirls Embr…PRESENT NOW — $10,000 · Human ServicesWHITE RIBBON USA — $5,000 · Civil RightsWESTSIDE FOOD BANK — $3,647 · Food & Nutrition
Other$80,936Philanthropy$28,500Health$20,000Youth Development$15,000Human Services$10,000Civil Rights$5,000Food & Nutrition$3,647

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetROD DEDEAUX FOUNDATION — $28,500 over 2y, 4.3% of budgetTHE HAROLD AND CAROLE PUMP FOUNDATION (FKA THE HAROLD PUMP FOUNDATION) — $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetHOOMAU KE OLA — $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetPRESENT NOW — $10,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetKyles Family Foundation — $10,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetGirls Embracing Mothers Inc — $5,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetWESTSIDE FOOD BANK — $3,647 over 2y, 0.1% of budget
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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA3.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Lum Davis 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 12 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph