Loading…
· Private foundation
THE WILLIAM ALBERS FOUNDATION
This foundation accepts unsolicited grant applications.
$2.0M
Granted FY2021
1
Grants
1
Communities
$2.0M
Largest
01What you fund
0198% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2020–2021.
Philanthropy$2.0MEducation$45kHuman Services$35kFood & Nutrition$5kHealth$5kOther$33k
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2020
cincinnati
2021
—
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2021 · 1 grant
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
$2,008,528
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
- Johnson Charitable Gift Fund$2,008,528
02The need
04
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:
Your human-services grants (FY20–20, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16% — the area typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
03Your field
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.
1
The University of Cincinnati Foundation
To inspire a community of uc and uc health supporters through the power of philanthropy.
Philanthropy
2
Saint Xavier University
Educate men and women to search for the truth, think critically, and communicate effectively.
Education
3
The Jewish Foundation of Cincinnati
Philanthropy
4
Cincinnati Institute of Fine Arts
With funding, services, and advocacy, ArtsWave fuels a more vibrant economy and connected community through the arts.
Arts & Culture
5
Christian Brothers University
Christian brothers university is a private, catholic comprehensive university committed to preparing students of all faiths and backgrounds to excel in their professional and public lives by providing challenging educational opportunities…
Education
6
The Cincinnati Foundation for the Aged
—
7
Daughters of the Cincinnati
—
8
United Way of Greater Cincinnati
The UWGC Foundation provides a flexible vehicle to perpetuate financial support of UWGC, its initiatives, its agencies, and the human services they provide.
Philanthropy
9
The Greater Cincinnati Foundation
As a trusted and connected partner, we inspire generous people to invest in a more equitable and vibrant region now and for generations to come.
Philanthropy
10
Foundation for Cincinnati Jewish Seniors
Health
11
Ohio Dominican University
As a Catholic liberal arts university in the Dominican tradition, Ohio Dominican University is guided in its educational mission by the Dominican motto: to contemplate truth and to share with others the fruits of this contemplation. Ohio…
Education
12
Saint Francis University
Non-profit educational institution located in loretto, pennsylvania.
Education
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The First Step Home Inc and the most unlike its peers is Xavier University. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network
10 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
9/10
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Philanthropy$2,008,528Education$45,000Human Services$35,000Other$32,600Food & Nutrition$5,000Health$5,000
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 Johnson Charitable Gift Fund ↗
- Who funds XAVIER UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds CINCINNATI ASSOC FOR THE BLIND ↗
- Who funds CHATFIELD COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds FIRST STEP HOME ↗
- Who funds FREESTORE-FOODBANK INC ↗
- Who funds OUR DAILY BREAD ↗
- Who funds DRAGONFLY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds STRATEGIES TO END HOMELESSNESS INC ↗
- Who funds PLEASANT RIDGE SCHOOL FOUNDATION ↗
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.
The Greater Cincinnati FoundationOH21.6× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: The Greater Cincinnati Foundation · Robert a & Marian K Kennedy · William P Anderson Foundation Central Trust · The Wohlgemuth Herschede Foundation Co · Charles H Dater Foundation Inc · Elsa M Heisel Sule Charitable Trust 2005 · Johnson Charitable Gift Fund · Ge Foundation · Homan Foundation · Williams Foundation · Ed & Joann Hubert Family · Tr Uw Jacob Schmidlapp #1
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 organisation THE WILLIAM ALBERS 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
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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.
04Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: Johnson Charitable Gift Fund.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
low risk
~12 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 7 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 300233491 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on Johnson Charitable Gift Fund, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 12 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 4% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to The William Albers Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The William Albers Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines