Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Trade It Forward Foundation

ADVANCING KNOWLEDGE, INSPIRING INNOVATON 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.

$81k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$30k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20232024.

Health$85kYouth Development$36kHuman Services$30kEmployment$10kPublic Safety & Disaster$10kPhilanthropy$10k
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $1k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $80k
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$30k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC$30,000
HEDGE FUNDS CARE INC$30,000
MICHAEL ANN AND SAQUON BARKLEY HOPE FOUNDATION$10,000
THE JERSEY CITY FIRE FOUNDATION$10,000
OWN YOUR FUTURE OUTREACH INC$1,000
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 (FY23–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 81% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%OWN YOUR FUTURE OUTREACH INC: $1k → 17%ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $30k → 17%MICHAEL ANN AND SAQUON BARKLEY HOPE FOUNDATION: $10k → 17%THE JERSEY CITY FIRE FOUNDATION: $10k → 14%TOGETHER TOWARDS TOMORROW INC: $35k → 4%NAMI NYC- NATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS OF NYC: $30k → 17%HEDGE FUNDS CARE INC: $30k → 17%WALL STREET BOUND: $10k → 17%JACKS TOMORROW INC: $25k → 17%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 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
Its Your Future Foundation

The organization provides college scholarships for children who survived cancer.

Education
2
Hope for the Youth Foundation
3
The J-4 Sports Foundation Inc

Help teens get to college

Human Services
4
Jpmorgan Chase Foundation
5
The Michael John Jacobus Foundation Inc
6
HOPE4YOUTH Cancer Foundation
Health
7
The Jmc Family Foundation
Philanthropy
8
Jacob Jack May Foundation
9
Finding Autistic Solutions for Tomorrow

Assistance to families effected by autis

Health
10
Pcu Mjcnaa-Usa Foundation
Philanthropy
11
Jmc Innovation Scholars Inc
Human Services
12
The Nick Bales Btr Foundation
Philanthropy

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is St Jude Children's Research Hospital Inc and the most unlike its peers is Michael Ann & Saquon Barkley Hope Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

04the grantee network

8 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. 8 of the 9 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

TOGETHER TOWARDS TOMORROW — $35,000 · OtherTOGETHER TOWARDS TOMORROWNATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS OF NEW YORK CITY INC — $30,000 · OtherNATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS OF N…ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC — $30,000 · HealthST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPIT…JACKS TOMORROW INC — $25,000 · HealthJACKS TOMORROW INCHEDGE FUNDS CARE INC — $30,000 · PhilanthropyHEDGE FUNDS CARE INCMICHAEL ANN & SAQUON BARKLEY HOPE FOUNDATION — $10,000 · PhilanthropyMICHAEL ANN & SAQUON BARKLEY HO…JERSEY CITY FIRE FOUNDATION — $10,000 · PhilanthropyJERSEY CITY FIRE FOUNDATIONWALL STREET BOUND INC — $10,000 · EmploymentOWN YOUR FUTURE OUTREACH INC — $1,000 · Youth Development
Other$65,000Health$55,000Philanthropy$50,000Employment$10,000Youth Development$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetNATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS OF NEW YORK CITY INC — $30,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC — $30,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHEDGE FUNDS CARE INC — $30,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetJACKS TOMORROW INC — $25,000 over 1y, 7.1% of budgetWALL STREET BOUND INC — $10,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetMICHAEL ANN & SAQUON BARKLEY HOPE FOUNDATION — $10,000 over 1y, 6.0% of budgetJERSEY CITY FIRE FOUNDATION — $10,000 over 1y, 8.7% of budgetOWN YOUR FUTURE OUTREACH INC — $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

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.

Jewish Communal FundNY12× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Communal Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Trade It Forward 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 · 10%1%3%6%10%your share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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.

    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 9 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph