· Private foundation
The Shiloh Foundation
Its FY2025 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 FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k29 grants · $43k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $45k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE ARC US FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
| FOOD FRIENDS | $10,000 |
| NATIONAL ARCHIVES FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| WASHINGTON IRELAND PROGRAM | $10,000 |
| BROADWAY CARES | $6,932 |
| MT LEBANON BAPTIST CHURCH | $5,000 |
| GOOD SUCCESS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT | $5,000 |
| INTEGRATED LIVING OPPORTUNITIES | $3,035 |
| SIGNATURE THEATRE | $3,000 |
| SOME SO OTHERS MIGHT EAT | $2,678 |
| VIVA SCHOOL OF DANCE | $2,588 |
| WILLIAMS SYNDROME ASSOC | $2,036 |
| JUNIOR TENNIS CHAMPIONS CENTER | $1,542 |
| RAZIA'S RAY OF HOPE FOUNDATION | $1,309 |
| THEATER WASHINGTON | $1,033 |
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 (FY17–25, $30k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 97% 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 +40% since the first grant, against +21% for the ones you funded once.
61 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2025, 40 since wound down; 12 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, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k 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
- NANATIONAL ARCHIVES FOUNDATION8× · 2017–2025 · $85k · revenue +20%
- WIWASHINGTON IRELAND PROGRAM FOR SERVICE & LEADERSHIP8× · 2017–2025 · $82k · revenue +91%
- FFFOOD & FRIENDS INC7× · 2017–2025 · $71k · revenue +139%
Funded once
- MVMT VERNON WEEKDAY SCHOOLone grant, 2018 · $5k
- HFHOPEWELL FUND LEARNINGone grant, 2021 · $5k
- TSThe Studio Theatre Incone grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +9%
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 mission of the international women's forum is to advance women's leadership worldwide. iwf takes direct action to achieve our mission in three important ways. connect: our convenings provide networking and cutting-edge content…
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
The washington area community investment fund (wacif) is a nonprofit community loan fund focused on increasing equity and economic opportunity in the washington, dc area's underserved communities. wacif's mission is driven is driven by…
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
The center for international policy is a woman-led, progressive, independent nonprofit center for research, education, and advocacy working to advance a more peaceful, just, and sustainable u.s. approach to foreign policy. through…
The npr foundation ("foundation") is organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of its sole supported organization, national public radio, inc. ("npr inc."). the foundation supports npr inc. through various activities such as…
The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
The center for american progress (cap) is an independent nonpartisan policy institute that is dedicated to improving the lives of all americans through bold, progressive ideas, as well as strong leadership and concerted action. our aim is…
At the internet society foundation, we focus on funding initiatives that strengthen the internet in function and reach so that it can effectively serve all people. our work advances the vision of the internet society (isoc): the internet…
To provide accurate, objective information and analysis on international strategic issues for legislators, diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business leaders, economists, the military, defense commentators, journalists,…
A nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to enhancing international peace and security in the 21st century, thereby retaining its focus on nuclear weapons but expanding to include other present emerging security threats.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Open Up Resources and the most unlike its peers is East Coast Corgi Rescue. 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 29 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% 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.
102 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. 102 of the 168 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 NATIONAL ARCHIVES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON IRELAND PROGRAM FOR SERVICE & LEADERSHIP ↗
- Who funds FOOD & FRIENDS INC ↗
- Who funds N STREET VILLAGE INC ↗
- Who funds THE AMERICAN IRELAND FUND (DBA THE IRELAND FUNDS AMERICA/THE IRELAND FUNDS) ↗
- Who funds Integrated Living Opportunities ↗
- Who funds SIGNATURE THEATRE INC ↗
- Who funds BROADWAY CARESEQUITY FIGHTS AIDS INC ↗
- Who funds WILLIAMS SYNDROME ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds BROADFUTURES INC ↗
- Who funds NeighborShare Inc ↗
- Who funds MADISON HOUSE AUTISM FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds VITAL VOICES GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds SITAR ARTS CENTER ↗
- Who funds GREATER WASHINGTON EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds RAZIAS RAY OF HOPE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Arise&Flourish Inc ↗
- Who funds JUNIOR TENNIS CHAMPIONS CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds The Studio Theatre Inc ↗
- Who funds METRO IAF INC ↗
- Who funds CITY YEAR INC ↗
- Who funds ARTSTREAM INC ↗
- Who funds Citizens Association of Georgetown ↗
- Who funds THEATREWASHINGTON ↗
- Who funds GEORGETOWN VILLAGE 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: Greater Washington Community Foundation · The Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation · Clark-Winchcole Foundation · Philip L Graham Fund co Graham Holdings Company · William S Abell Foundation Inc · Dimick Foundation John M Lynham Jr Trustee · United Way of the National Capital Area · Galena-Yorktown Foundation · Max & Victoria Dreyfus Foundation Inc · The Robert P and Arlene R Kogod Family Foundation · The Dorothy G Bender Foundation Inc · Eugene M Lang Foundation
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 Shiloh 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Association of University Centers On Disabilities — 34% of income from government
- City Year Inc — 11% of income from government
- The Arc of Prince George's County Inc — 2% of income from government
- Chesapeake Chamber Music Inc T/a Chesapeake Music — 2% 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 Shiloh Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Shiloh 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.