· Public charity
Tugg Corp
Innovative funding around entrepreneurship, education, and life experiences
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2020.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 5 grants below total $121,500 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $188,200 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $66,700 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2020
- $10k–50k4 grants · $57k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $65k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| RESILIENT CODERS | $65,000 |
| ONE BEAD PROJECT | $15,000 |
| MBADIKA | $15,000 |
| KODECONNECT INC | $15,000 |
| NAACP LDF | $11,500 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY19–19, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
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.
4 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2020, 2 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (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 FY2020, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $42k 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
Resilient Coders Inc3× · 2017–2020 · $165k · revenue +24%- MIMbadika Inc3× · 2017–2020 · $30k · revenue +801%
THIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC2× · 2017–2018 · $27k · revenue +44%
Funded once
- TITHINKGIVE INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $15k · revenue +594% · 25% of their budget
Catie's Closet Incgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $15k · revenue +38%- ARART RESOURCE COLLABORATIVE FOR KIDS (ARCK) INCORPORATEDone grant, 2019 · $15k · revenue +2%
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.
Digital Ready activates the creative potential of young adults, especially low-income residents, to build tangible pathways to economic opportunities in Boston's innovation economy.
Digital Girl, Inc. (DGI) is a non-profit organization dedicated to empowering the underserved youth of New York City, especially young girls, to pursue studies and careers in STEM ( Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) disciplines.
At g{code} house, our mission is to bridge the gap in opportunities for underrepresented communities in the tech industry. we believe in the power of education, community, and empowerment to create change and open doors to exciting careers…
Kids in tech, inc. is a statewide organization that excites, educates, and empowers children across massachusetts to use technology, promoting a positive environment and fostering lifelong interest in stem. through our after-school…
We empower underrepresented to grow their careers and businesses by harnessing in-demand tech skills.
To inspire excitement for learning, create paths to and through college, and promote careers in education.
Girls Dream Code is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization aiming to empower underrepresented girls, ages 10-24, to pursue an interest in technology by providing free tech and computer science based programs and resources. Our mission is to…
Techbridge Girls prepares out-of-school time STEM educators and volunteer STEM professionals with training and curricula to promote access, belonging, and persistence in STEM.
To bridge the gap between the current school curriculum and the immediate need for schools to prepare students for STEM skills and for jobs that do not yet exist.
Girls in tech is a social networking enterprise focused on the engagement, education and empowerment of like-minded, professional, intelligent and influential women in technology fields around the world.
Building Bridges Education (BBE) is a non-profit organization at the forefront of creating transformative, high-impact programming. BBE is committed to equity-driven initiatives that empower students to embark on journeys of…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Science Club for Girls Inc and the most unlike its peers is Mbadika Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
16 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. 16 of the 17 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 Resilient Coders Inc ↗
- Who funds MEDIAGIRLS INC ↗
- Who funds Mbadika Inc ↗
- Who funds THIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC ↗
- Who funds One Bead Project ↗
- Who funds THINKGIVE INC ↗
- Who funds KODECONNECT INC ↗
- Who funds Catie's Closet Inc ↗
- Who funds ART RESOURCE COLLABORATIVE FOR KIDS (ARCK) INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC ↗
- Who funds SCIENCE CLUB FOR GIRLS INC ↗
- Who funds Y2Y NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds weTHRIVE INC ↗
- Who funds TECH GOES HOME INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds INNERCITY WEIGHTLIFTING INC ↗
- Who funds Best Buddies International 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: Boston Foundation Inc · Liberty Mutual Foundation Inc · Cummings Foundation Grants Inc (Fka Oneworld Boston Inc) · Eastern Bank Foundation · The Cabot Family Charitable Trust · The Devonshire Foundation · Boston After School & Beyond Inc · Verizon Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc
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 Tugg Corp 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- WeTHRIVE Inc — 88% of income from government
- Tech Goes Home Incorporated — 10% of income from government
- Catie's Closet Inc — 4% of income from government
- Best Buddies International Inc — 4% of income from government
- Third Sector New England Inc — 3% 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 Tugg Corp?
Find your warmest path to Tugg Corp 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.