Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Ramsey Community Services Foundation

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.

$88k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it funds
0161% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Arts & Culture$315kHousing & Shelter$210kEducation$70kCrime & Legal$68kPublic Safety & Disaster$66kReligion$28kHealth$23kPhilanthropy$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $18k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$5k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH$50,000
COLLEGE CONNECT CITY OF TEMPE$10,000
ASU$10,000
DILLEY$7,650
ELAINE$5,000
SCOTTSDALE FIRE FIGHTERS CHARITIES$5,000
02The need
03

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 (FY19–25, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%ELAINE: $5k → 11%ELAINE: $5k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
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.
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.

68%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 12 repeat orgs$572k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +73% since the first grant, against +5% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
20

Total granted

$1.2M
$572k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+73%
+5%

Still filing today

25%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Public Safety & DisasterArts & CultureHousing & ShelterHuman 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

  • FO
    FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC
    5× · 2018–2025 · $270k · revenue +274%
  • VO
    VALLEY OF THE SUN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $15k · revenue +73%
  • E
    Elaine
    2× · 2019–2025 · $10k · revenue +71%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $200k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $150k
  • CA
    CENTRAL ARIZONA SHELTER SERVICES INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $50k · revenue +74%
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.

1
The Dons of Arizona
Education
2
Tzevet Hatzolah Emergency Response

Ensure that every segment of israeli society is protected from terrorism and is well equipped to respond to life threatening emergencies

Public Safety & Disaster
3
Jewish Federation of El Paso and Las Cruces

Serving the jewish community by engaging, connecting, supporting and celebrating jewish life, values and culture in el paso, las cruces, israel and beyond.

—
4
Jewish Family & Children's Service of Southern Arizona Inc

Jewish family & children's services of southern arizona helps all people meet their full potential by providing expert community and behavioral health services.

Human Services
5
Greater Phoenix Center for Jewish Philanthropy

To energize and sustain jewish life and leadership throughout greater phoenix, in israel, and around the world.

Human Services
6
Ahavas Torah V'chesed
Philanthropy
7
Phoenix Jewish Community Kivel Nursing Home

Operation of assisted living facilities

Health
8
Ziv Partners Inc

Raise funds in support of ziv medical center, which delivers trauma care, advanced mental health treatment, and inclusive healing to israels most diverse and at-risk communities.

Health
9
Shabbat Project Arizona

Shabbat Awareness

Religion
10
Jewish Caring Network Gevuras Yarden Inc

assistance with serious illness

Health
11
Hillel the Foundation for Jewish Campus Life

Enriching the lives of Jewish students and staff at Arizona State University through dynamic and innovative programming which deepens understanding of and creates excitement for Jewish life SO THEY MAY ENRICH THE JEWISH PEOPLE, ISRAEL AND…

—
12
Jewish Family Service of Colorado Inc

Improving the lives of individuals and families in need throughout colorado by taking an integrated approach to delivering comprehensive support services.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association Inc; the most unlike its peers is International Public Safety Association 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

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 32 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $455,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $200,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $187,369 · OtherIndividual grant recipientHABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $150,000 · OtherHABITAT FOR HUMANITYIndividual grant recipient: $150,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCOLLEGE CONNECT CITY OF TEMPE: $64,500 · Other+20 more: $216,802 · Other+20 moreFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $270,000 · Arts & CultureFRIENDS OF UNITE…INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC SAFETY ASSOCIATION INC: $50,000 · Public Safety & DisasterUNITED PHOENIX FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION INC: $2,500 · Public Safety & DisasterCENTRAL ARIZONA SHELTER SERVICES INC: $50,000 · Housing & ShelterElaine: $10,000 · Human ServicesFYXX FOUNDATION: $7,113 · Animals
Other$1,423,671Arts & Culture$270,000Public Safety & Disaster$52,500Housing & Shelter$50,000Human Services$10,000Animals$7,113

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $270,000 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetCENTRAL ARIZONA SHELTER SERVICES INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetINTERNATIONAL PUBLIC SAFETY ASSOCIATION INC: $50,000 over 1y, 54% of budgetVALLEY OF THE SUN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $15,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetElaine: $10,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetFYXX FOUNDATION: $7,113 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetDESERT GATHERINGS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 7.7% of budgetUNITED PHOENIX FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budget
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.

  • Who funds FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC ↗
  • Who funds CENTRAL ARIZONA SHELTER SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC SAFETY ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds VALLEY OF THE SUN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds Elaine ↗
  • Who funds FYXX FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds DESERT GATHERINGS INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED PHOENIX FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗

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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Arizona Community FoundationAZ13× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Arizona Community Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile 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 Ramsey Community Services Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Ramsey Community Services Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Ramsey Community Services Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Ramsey Community Services 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 32 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Ramsey Community Services’ filings →

    More from the funding graph