· Private foundation
The Why Wouldn'T We 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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $5,400 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $3,000 |
| GRACE COVENANT CHURCH DC | $1,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000 |
| THE RILEY GLEASON FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
| DAILY BREAD | $500 |
| RAINEY ELITE SPEED | $500 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 72% of your 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 13% of The Why Wouldn'T We Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +54% since the first grant, against +54% for the ones you funded once.
8 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 6 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, 14% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k 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
- LMLOVE MCKINLEY INC2× · 2018–2019 · $4k · revenue +54%
- TRTHE RILEY GLEASON FOUNDATION3× · 2022–2024 · $3k · revenue +18%
- WEWashington Episcopal Day School Inc2× · 2018–2019 · $3k · revenue +53%
Funded once
- MBMCLEAN BIBLE CHURCHone grant, 2019 · $15k
- BCBRAZOS CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INCone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -98%
- BHBOARDMAN HIGH SCHOOL BOOSTER CLUBone grant, 2018 · $3k
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.
We are a k-12 christian school founded under the following (4) pillars: academics: we provide an amazing accredited academic program utilizing 100% certified teachers. schedule: we provide our students and their families an opportunity on…
Provide an education to children in lower and middle school using classical christian methodology.
At levis legacy, our mission is clear to serve and support families facing the daunting reality of chds, along with the dedicated medical professionals who stand by their side. our mission is not just to weather the storm with them but to…
Colorado christian academy provides an innovative christ-centered education that prioritizes academic achievements and individual development of the whole child. in relationship with parents, we will build healthy foundations that result…
Our program teaches students of all abilities through solid christian pedagogy. the jubilee school is a direct outworking of our theology, combining conventional and unique learners in a christian & classical pre- kindergarten - 12th grade…
Regents' mission is to provide a classical and christian education, founded upon and informed by a biblical worldview, that equips our students to know, love, and practice that which is true, good, and the beautiful and challenges them to…
Our mission is to disciple image bearers to love god, to train in true discernment and equip them to rightly order their love.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Regents School of Oxford Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Riley Gleason Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
12 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. 12 of the 58 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 BRAZOS CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds LOVE MCKINLEY INC ↗
- Who funds THE RILEY GLEASON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Washington Episcopal Day School Inc ↗
- Who funds SAMARITAN'S PURSE ↗
- Who funds KIDZ1STFUND INC ↗
- Who funds REGENTS SCHOOL OF OXFORD INC ↗
- Who funds Huddleston Volunteer Fire Department Inc ↗
- Who funds RBC MINISTRIES ↗
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: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Why Wouldn'T We 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.