· Private foundation
The Six Four 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 FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $6k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $70k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $550k
- $250k+5 grants · $11M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| VELLORE CHRISTIAN MEDICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION | $5,945,000 |
| PROSTATE CANCER FOUNDATION | $3,200,000 |
| AMERICAN RED CROSS - NORTH TEXAS REGION | $1,000,000 |
| THRIVE SCHOLARS | $750,000 |
| INDIASPORA | $333,333 |
| DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE | $200,000 |
| AMERICAN INDIA FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| OPERATION HEALING FORCES | $100,000 |
| MT CARMEL EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| ST BALDRICK'S FOUNDATION | $50,000 |
| CONNECTING POINT OF PARK CITIES | $25,000 |
| NOMI NETWORK | $15,000 |
| FARE MEALS | $10,000 |
| CHARITY ADVISORS INC | $10,000 |
| CANADAIAN ASSOCIATION OF NEW YORK FOUNDATION INC | $10,000 |
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 (FY20–24, $2.7M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 52% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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 +53% since the first grant, against +8% for the ones you funded once.
16 repeat relationships — 15 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 2 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; $1.0M 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
- VCVELLORE CHRISTIAN MEDICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC2× · 2022–2024 · $8.3M · revenue +97% · 61% of their budget
- PCPROSTATE CANCER FOUNDATION5× · 2020–2024 · $7.2M · revenue +57%
- IINDIASPORA3× · 2022–2024 · $1000k · revenue +40%
Funded once
- UOUniversity Of Dublin Fundone grant, 2020 · $333k · revenue +10%
- IMIIT MADRAS FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $300k · revenue +149%
- BBioLogosone grant, 2021 · $50k
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 mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes. nyu's primary missions are education, research and scholarship, and patient care.
Sanford burnham prebys medical discovery institute's mission is to advance the biomedical sciences by cultivating the next generation of scientific leaders, providing meaningful opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to learn,…
Education, research, medical services and other public services.
Organization's mission: boston university is an international, comprehensive, private research university, committed to educating students to be reflective, resourceful individuals ready to live, adapt, and lead in an interconnected world.…
We educate the next generation of leaders to improve the health of our society.
Medical research organization van andel research institute is an independent biomedical research organization committed to improving the health and enhancing the lives of current and future generations.
Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.
Biu produces students who excel in the sciences, humanities, law, engineering, business & the arts.
Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.
We support, through philanthropic efforts, the improvement of urological care globally by funding research, clinical education, patient education, and humanitarian programs.
Aahi is a nonprofit biotech research institute, bringing together the best experts, technologies, and platforms to create accessible, high-quality products and solutions for harnessing the immune system to alleviate disease.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is St Baldrick's Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Connecting Point of Park Cities. 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 33 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 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% 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.
26 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. 26 of the 31 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 VELLORE CHRISTIAN MEDICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PROSTATE CANCER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THRIVE SCHOLARS ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds INDIASPORA ↗
- Who funds THE AMERICAN INDIA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds MOUNT CARMEL EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds University Of Dublin Fund ↗
- Who funds OPERATION HEALING FORCES INC ↗
- Who funds IIT MADRAS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CONNECTING POINT OF PARK CITIES ↗
- Who funds ST BALDRICK'S FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ST JOHN'S UNIVERSITY NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds NOMI NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds VIJAY AMRITRAJ FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FARE MEALS INC ↗
- Who funds MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF IOWA INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds THE CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF NEW YORK FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NEW JERSEY BICYCLE COALITION INC DBA D/B/A NEW JERSEY BIKE & WALK COALITION ↗
- Who funds THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee 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 Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Endowment Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift 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 Six Four 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.
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% 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 Six Four Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Six Four 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.