· Private foundation
The Selfreliance Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k41 grants · $147k
- $10k–50k32 grants · $565k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $365k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| St Nicholas Ukr Cath Eparchy | $95,000 |
| St Joseph Ukr Cath Church | $75,000 |
| Selfreliance Association | $75,000 |
| St Nicholas Cathedral School | $65,000 |
| Sts Volodymyr and Olha Ukr Cath Church | $55,000 |
| Immaculate Conception Ukr Cath Church | $37,500 |
| Ukrainian Catholic University Found | $35,200 |
| Amer Ukr Youth Assoc inc Pavlushkov Bran | $35,000 |
| Amer Ukr Youth Assoc inc Vitovsky Branch | $32,500 |
| St John the Baptist UCC Whippany | $30,000 |
| St Andrew Ukr Orth Cathedral | $25,000 |
| St Nicholas Ukr Cath Cathedral | $25,000 |
| Ukrainian National Museum | $25,000 |
| Plast Inc | $25,000 |
| St Volodymyr Ukr Orth Cathedral | $20,000 |
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 (FY22–24, $185k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 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 +71% since the first grant, against +2% for the ones you funded once.
82 repeat relationships — 27 still active in FY2024, 55 since wound down; 47 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, 38% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $666k 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
- UCUkrainian Catholic University Foundation7× · 2018–2024 · $211k · revenue +167%
- SASelfreliance Association3× · 2022–2024 · $185k · revenue +182%
- UIUKRAINIAN INSTITUTE OF MODERN ART7× · 2018–2024 · $135k · revenue +52%
Funded once
- ICImmaculate Conception Ukrainian Byzone grant, 2019 · $82k
- SJSt John the Baptist UCCone grant, 2021 · $40k
- SJSt John the Baptist Ukrainian Catholic Churchone grant, 2020 · $34k
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.
Providing services to Ukrainian Citizens
Research, advancement and promotion of Ukrainian studies and culture in the United States.
Focusing on amplifying Ukrainian voices, organizing community rallies and fundraisers, and sending aid to address critical humanitarian needs in Ukraine and assisting parolees and refugees in the USA.
American Ukranian Relief Organization (the Organization) intends to help Ukranians suffering from the war with Russian federation. As a volunteer based organization comprised mostly of Ukranians, the Organization would like to help bring…
We actively and zealously work to develop awareness, knowledge and understanding about Ukraine in Colorado and beyond. We work hard to raise funds to provide medical and humanitarian aid to Ukrainians through a network of established…
In 2006, Ukrainian Foundation was established by the immigrants from Ukraine to help the Ukrainian refugees adjust to their new home in the United States. Our base is in Portland, OR, a home to over 100,000 immigrants from Ukraine. With…
We dedicate our efforts to promoting and showcasing Ukrainian arts, music, and dance, organizing Ukrainian cultural events, supporting cultural family-friendly activities, educating interested youth and adults in folklore arts. We are also…
To support services and programs which contribute to the preservation, enrichment and promotion of ukrainian identity, language and culture.
Humanitarian support for ukraine
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ukrainian Congress Committee of America and the most unlike its peers is Sc Connection-Ua Npf. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 31 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 18% of your grantees by number, and just 19% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
31 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. 31 of the 190 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 Ukrainian Catholic University Foundation ↗
- Who funds Selfreliance Association ↗
- Who funds UKRAINIAN INSTITUTE OF MODERN ART ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN UKRAINIAN YOUTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN UKRAINIAN YOUTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds Hromovytsia Ukrainian Dance Ensemble NFP ↗
- Who funds UKRAINIAN NATIONAL HOME OF JERSEY CITY ↗
- Who funds UKRAINIAN GENOCIDE FAMINE FOUNDATION USA INC ↗
- Who funds VYSHYVANKA ↗
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 Heritage Foundation of First Security Federal Savings Bank Inc · Ukrainian American Community (Uac) Foundation Inc · The Polsky Foundation · Charles Stewart Mott Foundation · UMANA Foundation · The Maria Hulai Lion Foundation Inc · Ukrainian Community Foundation of Philadelphia · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust
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 Selfreliance 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.
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 Selfreliance Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Selfreliance 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.