Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Ten-Ten 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.

$220k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$70k
Largest
01What you fund
0184% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Crime & Legal$490kPhilanthropy$390kEducation$238kCommunity Improvement$200kEmployment$153kHuman Services$113kEnvironment$60kRecreation & Sports$50kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $80k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $130k
$20,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$569k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WOMEN'S EMPOWERMENT NETWORK$70,000
LEGAL AID OF WESTERN MISSOURI$60,000
UMKC FOUNDATION$30,000
WILDWOOD OUTDOOR EDUCATION$20,000
HARMONY PROJECT KC$20,000
MOUNT CARAMEL CEMETARY FUND$10,000
POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE OF KANSAS CITY$5,000
HARVESTERS - THE COMMUNITY FOOD NETWORK$5,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%TIDES FOUNDATION: $230k → 10%WILDWOOD OUTDOOR EDUCATION: $20k → 13%WOMEN'S EMPLOYMENT NETWORK: $75k → 15%TIDES FOUNDATION: $100k → 10%WILDWOOD OUTDOOR EDUCATION: $20k → 13%WOMEN'S EMPLOYMENT NETWORK: $70k → 15%WILDWOOD OUTDOOR EDUCATION: $20k → 13%SEE STATEMENT: $468k → 15%SEE STATEMENT: $364k → 15%HARVESTERS - THE COMMUNITY FOOD NETWORK: $5k → 15%LEGAL AID OF WESTERN MISSOURI: $60k → 15%KC POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE: $5k → 15%LEGAL AID OF WESTERN MISSOURI: $60k → 15%KC POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE: $5k → 15%LEGAL AID OF WESTERN MISSOURI: $60k → 15%POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE OF KANSAS CITY: $5k → 15%UMKC FOUNDATION: $30k → 15%UMKC FOUNDATION: $30k → 15%UMKC FOUNDATION: $30k → 15%SEE STATEMENT: $423k → 15%HARMONY KC: $20k → 15%HARMONY PROJECT KC: $20k → 15%HARMONY KC: $20k → 15%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.2M · 21 repeat orgs$433k to everyone else

21 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
30

Total granted

$1.2M
$323k

Still filing today

19%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 50% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $110k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’23’24’25
Crime & LegalEmploymentEducationEnvironmentFood & NutritionYouth DevelopmentOther

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

  • LA
    Legal Aid of Western Missouri
    3× · 2023–2025 · $180k · revenue +2%
  • LA
    Legal Aid of Western Missouri Endowment
    3× · 2019–2021 · $180k
  • WE
    WOMENS EMPLOYMENT NETWORK
    2× · 2023–2024 · $145k · revenue -11%

Funded once

  • GK
    Greater Kansas City Community Foundation
    one grant, 2021 · $60k
  • MR
    Mattie Rhodes Center
    one grant, 2019 · $40k
  • WO
    Wildwood Outdoor Education Center
    one grant, 2019 · $35k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
04the grantee network

7 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 7 of the 57 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
4/7
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Legal Aid of Western Missouri Endowment — $180,000 · OtherLegal Aid of Western Missouri EndowmentLegal Aid of Western Missouri — $120,000 · OtherLegal Aid of Western MissouriHarmony Project KC — $100,000 · OtherHarmony Project KCWOMEN'S EMPOWERMENT NETWORK — $70,000 · OtherWOMEN'S EMPOWERMENT NETWORKWildwood Education Center — $70,000 · OtherWildwood Education CenterTides Foundation — $70,000 · OtherTides FoundationGreater Kansas City Community Foundation — $60,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $40,000 · OtherMattie Rhodes Center — $40,000 · Other+41 more — $443,825 · Other+41 moreTIDES FOUNDATION — $330,000 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUNDATIONLegal Aid of Western Missouri — $180,000 · Crime & LegalLegal Aid …WOMENS EMPLOYMENT NETWORK — $145,000 · EmploymentUMKC FOUNDATION — $90,000 · EducationWildwood Outdoor Education Center — $60,000 · EnvironmentHARVESTERS - THE COMMUNITY FOOD NETWORK — $5,000 · Food & NutritionPOLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE OF KC INC — $5,000 · Youth Development
Other$1,193,825Philanthropy$330,000Crime & Legal$180,000Employment$145,000Education$90,000Environment$60,000Food & Nutrition$5,000Youth Development$5,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTIDES FOUNDATION — $330,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLegal Aid of Western Missouri — $180,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetWOMENS EMPLOYMENT NETWORK — $145,000 over 2y, 6.5% of budgetUMKC FOUNDATION — $90,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetWildwood Outdoor Education Center — $60,000 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetHARVESTERS - THE COMMUNITY FOOD NETWORK — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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 TIDES FOUNDATION
  • Who funds Legal Aid of Western Missouri
  • Who funds WOMENS EMPLOYMENT NETWORK
  • Who funds UMKC FOUNDATION
  • Who funds Wildwood Outdoor Education Center
  • Who funds HARVESTERS - THE COMMUNITY FOOD NETWORK

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.

Greater Kansas City Community FoundationMO13.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Greater Kansas City Community Foundation · Amazonsmile 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 Ten-Ten 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%your share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%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 · 0–10%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Ten-Ten Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Ten-Ten 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 57 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

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

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph