· Private foundation
The Potato Fund Inc
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2023–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GiveWell | $2,500 |
| United Way of Henderson County | $2,500 |
| Intl Rescue Committee | $2,500 |
| Pisgah Legal Services | $2,000 |
| MANNA FoodBank | $2,000 |
| Homeward Bound | $2,000 |
| Charities Aid Foundation CAF of America | $2,000 |
| National Network of Abortion Funds | $2,000 |
| Mountain Housing Opportunities | $2,000 |
| Humane Society of the United States | $1,500 |
| GiveDirectly | $1,500 |
| Conserving Carolina | $1,500 |
| American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals | $1,500 |
| California Community Foundation | $1,250 |
| St Judes Childrens Research Hospital | $1,000 |
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 (FY23–25, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, 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.
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +27% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
15 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
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, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
- CCConserving Carolina3× · 2023–2025 · $6k · revenue +93%
- TCTHE CLEAR FUND3× · 2023–2025 · $6k · revenue +23%
- HCHenderson County United Way Inc2× · 2024–2025 · $4k · revenue +142%
Funded once
- ADAlzheimer's Disease Researchone grant, 2024 · $2k
THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INCone grant, 2024 · $500 · revenue -18%- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $332
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.
Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…
We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world. we take a multidisciplinary, intergenerational, life-cycle approach that contributes to (see schedule o)four global…
Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.
Conservation law foundation, inc. (clf) protects new england's environment for the benefit of all people and future generations. we use the law, science, and markets to create solutions that preserve and restore our natural resources,…
To research and develop centrist policy ideas.
We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…
Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.
Ctnc conserves land in ways that inspire and enable people to build resilient, just communities. we carry out our mission in collaboration with other conservation organizations and the communities we serve. our goal is to lessen the…
RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.
We work towards a future where birds thrive across the americas because audubon is a powerful, diverse, and ever-growing force for conservation. (continued on schedule o).
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Homeward Bound of Western North Carolina Inc and the most unlike its peers is International Rescue Committee Inc. 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 37 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 2% 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.
28 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. 28 of the 38 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 Conserving Carolina ↗
- Who funds THE CLEAR FUND ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds Henderson County United Way Inc ↗
- Who funds PISGAH LEGAL SERVICES ↗
- Who funds HOMEWARD BOUND OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA INC ↗
- Who funds THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ↗
- Who funds Humane World for Animals Inc ↗
- Who funds GIVEDIRECTLY INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds MOUNTAIN HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES INC ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds MANNA FOOD BANK INC ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF HENDERSON COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
- Who funds THE FRIENDS OF CLAYTOR LAKE INC ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO INC ↗
- Who funds PARKINSON'S FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA 414 DANIEL BOONE COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds Blue Ridge Bicycle Club ↗
- Who funds ASHEVILLE ON BIKES INC ↗
- Who funds THE PISGAH CONSERVANCY ↗
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: The Community Foundation of Western North Carolina Inc · Dogwood Health Trust · Bailey Family Foundation Inc · Duke Energy Foundation · Foundation for the Carolinas · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc
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 Potato Fund 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.
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.