· Private foundation
The Power 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k17 grants · $20k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $44k
- $250k+1 grant · $300k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE CENTER FOR MICHIGAN INC | $300,000 |
| EMPOWERED TEACHING INITIATIVE | $20,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAINS | $13,500 |
| UNITED WAY FOR SOUTHEASTERN MICHIGAN | $10,000 |
| ST ANDREW'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH | $5,000 |
| AMERICAN FRIENDS OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OXFORD | $2,000 |
| DENVER SOUTH PTSA | $2,000 |
| TEMPLE EMMANUEL | $1,000 |
| JEWISH RESOURCE CENTER | $1,000 |
| DENVER SOUTH PTSA | $1,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
| COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF MARQUETTE COUNTY | $1,000 |
| MICHIGAN HILLEL | $1,000 |
| CITIZENS RESEARCH COUNCIL OF MICHIGAN | $1,000 |
| AMERICAN DITCHLEY FOUNDATION | $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 (FY17–21, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 57% 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 +46% since the first grant, against +28% for the ones you funded once.
21 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $34k 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
THE CENTER FOR MICHIGAN8× · 2017–2024 · $2.8M · revenue +254%- UOUniversity of Michigan8× · 2017–2024 · $2.3M · revenue +202% · 78% of their budget
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MICHIGAN3× · 2017–2023 · $204k · revenue +28%
Funded once
- COCITY OF FARMINGTONone grant, 2017 · $30k
- SJST JOHNS EPISCOPAL CHURCHone grant, 2017 · $10k
- UMUNIVERSITY MUSICAL SOCIETYgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +93%
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.
The university of virginia investment management company (uvimco) is organized to invest funds on behalf of the rector and visitors of the university of virginia (the university or uva) and university-associated organizations (uaos).
Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…
The mission of the uc davis foundation is to secure, steward and manage private gifts for uc davis.
See schedule o colorado state university foundation assists in the promotion, development, and enhancement of facilities and educational programs and enhancements of faculty, students, and alumni of colorado state university (csu). this is…
To hold title and perform related functions in connection with a research park and innovation center in support of michigan state university research foundation.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
The university of montana foundation inspires philanthropic support to enhance excellence and opportunity at the university of montana.
Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.
We empower directors and transform boards to be future ready.
The common application is a not-for-profit membership organization of over 1,100 colleges and universities across the globe committed to access, equity, and integrity in the college admission process. every year, over 1.5 million students…
Business leaders for michigan is a nonprofit, nonpartisan statewide organization driven by ceos from the state's leading employers, all working toward a shared goal: making michigan a top 10 state for jobs, talent and a thriving economy.…
To provide the highest level of stewardship for university donors through professional management and oversight of the university of minnesota foundation's assets by creating a focused investment environment with clarity of purpose,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood Inc and the most unlike its peers is Pta Colorado Congress dba South High School Ptsa. 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 42 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
39 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. 39 of the 53 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 THE CENTER FOR MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds University of Michigan ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN PLANNED PARENTHOOD INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF WASHTENAW COUNTY ↗
- Who funds PTA Colorado Congress dba South High School PTSA ↗
- Who funds EMPOWERED TEACHING INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds GRALAND COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OXFORD INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY FOR SOUTHEASTERN MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY MUSICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds THE AMERICAN DITCHLEY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CITIZENS RESEARCH COUNCIL OF MICHIGAN INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF MARQUETTE COUNTY ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds JEWISHColorado ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds KEVINS SONG A NONPROFIT COMMUNITY EDUCATION ON DEPRESSION & SUICIDE ↗
- Who funds SANDY HOOK PROMISE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY SUPPORT FUND INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN B'NAI B'RITH HILLEL FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN PEACE & JUSTICE CENTER ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE COLORADO NONPROFIT DEVELOPMENT CENTER ↗
- Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds HAVEN INC ↗
- Who funds LIVLYME FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEV COUNCIL INC ↗
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 Denver Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · The Colorado Health Foundation · Dte Energy Foundation · Charles Stewart Mott Foundation · Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · Western Union Foundation · Rose Community Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Bruce and Phipps Menk Family Foundation · Ethel and James Flinn Foundation · McGregor 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 Power 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.
- Sandy Hook Promise Foundation — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Power Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Power Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.