Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

White Swan Foundation Inc

Pennywise supports innovative, regenerative, and enduring solutions that will uplift communities and empower individuals by making grants and providing technical assistance.

$189k
Granted FY2024still arriving
17
Grants FY2024still arriving
12
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
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 FY2020–2024.

International$119kEnvironment$87kHealth$54kCivil Rights$52kPublic Benefit$41kEducation$36kPublic Safety & Disaster$30kHuman Services$25kOther$0
02FY2024 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 17 grants below total $166,800 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $188,517 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $21,717 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k7 grants · $55k
  • $10k–50k10 grants · $112k
$10,000
Median grant
12
States reached
$169k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
1 VOTE COUNTS$20,000
NOISE FOR NOW$12,000
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH ACCESS PROJECT$10,000
VERMONT ADAPTIVE$10,000
THE WATERWHEEL FOUNDATION$10,000
INSTITUTO LAB$10,000
HIGH FIVES NONPROFIT FOUNDATION$10,000
NEW NORTH CAROLINA PROJECT$10,000
ALIGHT$10,000
GEDAKINA INC$10,000
SOIL$9,800
APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY COLLABORATIVE$8,000
LGBT DETROIT$8,000
LITER OF LIGHT USA$8,000
1 HOOD MEDIA ACADEMY$7,000
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:

Your human-services grants (FY21–24, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%INSTITUTO LAB: $10k → 11%Tides Foundation: $10k → 10%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.

Which US states your grants reach

ME
VT
MN
MI
NY
PA
NJ
CA
CO
MD
AZ
NM
KS
NC
DC
GA
FL

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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 10% of White Swan Foundation Inc’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.

White Swan Foundation Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 8.6% directed abroad (not shown)

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.

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.

48%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$250k · 7 repeat orgs$272k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +49% since the first grant, against +6% for the ones you funded once.

7 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
15

Total granted

$250k
$175k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+49%
+6%

Still filing today

100%
93%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 42% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $97k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalHealthEducationCivil RightsFood & NutritionHuman ServicesOther

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

  • SO
    SUSTAINABLE ORGANIC INTEGRATED LIVELIHOODS C/O MELANIE STEVENSON
    5× · 2020–2024 · $60k · revenue +49%
  • AP
    AGUA PARA LA VIDA
    3× · 2020–2022 · $36k · revenue +188%
  • A
    ALIGHT
    3× · 2022–2024 · $34k · revenue +22%

Funded once

  • RAZOM INC
    one grant, 2022 · $26k · revenue -65%
  • BC
    BVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $20k · revenue +79%
  • ST
    STEPS TO END DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $15k · revenue +220%

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

04Your 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
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
2
Asociacion Interamericana Para La Defensa Del Ambiente

To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.

Crime & Legal
3
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
4
Women Donors Network

Women donors network advances a just, equitable, and sustainable world through the power of philanthropy, women's leadership, and collective and individual action.

Philanthropy
5
Environment Next Inc

Environment next supports individuals, nonprofits and businesses around the world on solutions to complex climate issues. we provide leadership, outreach and communication support, grants, and investments to empower leaders and their ideas…

Environment
6
Guernica Centre for InternationalJustice

The Guernica Centre for International Justice represents the interests of victims in national and international legal proceedings, putting in place transnational accountability strategies that seek to maximize the protection of victims'…

International
7
Right to Democracy Project

Advance democracy, equity, and self-determination in U.S. territories through participatory advocacy, narrative and cultural change, and ecosystem building.

Civil Rights
8
Democracy Works Inc

The organization's mission is to leverage web-technologies to improve civic engagement and voter education.

Civil Rights
9
Well Aware Inc

Well Aware's mission is to provide innovative and sustainable solutions to water scarcity and contamination in East Africa.

International
10
Water Protector Legal Collective

The water protector legal collective is an indigenous-led legal nonprofit that provides support and advocacy for indigenous peoples and original nations, the earth, and climate justice movements.

Crime & Legal
11
UltraViolet Education Fund

Ultraviolet education fund (uvef) is a 501c3 organization. ultraviolet is the premier national organization advocating for gender justice issues using creative, strategic campaigning and digital-first organizing. ultraviolet drives…

Civil Rights
12
E3G Third Generation Environmentalism

E3g is a leading international not-for-profit think tank specialising in climate diplomacy harnessing expertise in the politics and economics of climate change.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Clean the World Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Waterwheel Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyPolicy Research and AdvocacyYouth Sports ProgramsEnvironmental Conservation …Food Banks and PantriesLgbtq+ Community SupportCommunity FoundationsPregnancy Support ServicesChristian Missionary Organi…Women & Girls Leadership De…
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 17 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%3%<5yr14%21%5–10yr19%35%10–20yr16%28%20–35yr13%10%35–55yr16%3%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%5%<5yr14%21%5–10yr19%36%10–20yr16%26%20–35yr13%11%35–55yr16%2%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/35
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,530

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

05the grantee network

34 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. 34 of the 35 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
33/34
Grantees still filing
16/34
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

ALIGHT — $34,250 · InternationalALIGHTRAZOM INC — $26,000 · InternationalRAZOM INCCLEAN THE WORLD FOUNDATION INC — $10,000 · InternationalCLEAN THE WORLD F…LITER OF LIGHT USA INC — $8,000 · InternationalLITER OF LIGHT US…WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC — $7,665 · InternationalWORLD CENTRAL KIT…1 VOTE COUNTS — $45,000 · Education1 VOTE COUNTSNEW NORTH CAROLINA PROJECT — $22,000 · EducationNEW NORTH CAROL…APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY COLLABORATIVE — $8,000 · EducationAPPROPRIATE TEC…SUSTAINABLE ORGANIC INTEGRATED LIVELIHOODS C/O MELANIE STEVENSON — $59,800 · Food & NutritionSUSTAINABLE O…Aunt Dot's Place Inc — $7,000 · Food & NutritionAunt Dot's Pl…REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH ACCESS PROJECT INC — $33,600 · HealthREPRODUCTIVE …NOISE FOR NOW — $12,000 · HealthNOISE FOR NOWABORTION CARE NETWORK — $10,000 · HealthABORTION CARE…HIGH FIVES NONPROFIT FOUNDATION — $10,000 · HealthHIGH FIVES NO…AGUA PARA LA VIDA — $35,500 · OtherAGUA PARA LA VIDABlack Voters Matter Fund Inc — $10,000 · OtherBlack Voters Matter Fund IncMAINE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION — $7,000 · OtherZen Barn Farms — $6,030 · OtherTHE VERMONT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $10,000 · OtherTHE VERMONT COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONCANDID — $10,000 · OtherCANDIDTHE WATERWHEEL FOUNDATION — $10,000 · OtherTHE WATERWHEEL FOUNDATIONVERMONT ADAPTIVE SKI AND SPORTS — $20,000 · OtherVERMONT ADAPTIVE SKI AND SPORTSGEDAKINA INC — $10,000 · OtherGEDAKINA INCDESTINATION INNOVATION INC — $10,000 · OtherDESTINATION INNOVATION INC1 FOR THE PLANET INC — $10,000 · Other1 FOR THE PLANET INCGEORGIA CONSERVATION VOTERS ED FUND — $7,000 · OtherLAST PRISONER PROJECT — $11,000 · OtherLAST PRISONER PROJECTINTERVALE CENTER INC — $10,000 · OtherINTERVALE CENTER INC1HOOD MEDIA ACADEMY INC — $7,000 · OtherBVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE INC — $20,000 · Civil RightsNEW VOICES PITTSBURGH INC — $12,000 · Civil RightsLGBT Detroit — $8,000 · Civil RightsSTEPS TO END DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INC — $15,000 · Human ServicesInstituto Lab — $10,000 · Human ServicesTIDES CENTER — $10,000 · Human Services
International$85,915Education$75,000Food & Nutrition$66,800Health$65,600Other$173,530Civil Rights$40,000Human Services$35,000

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 budgetSUSTAINABLE ORGANIC INTEGRATED LIVELIHOODS C/O MELANIE STEVENSON — $59,800 over 5y, 4.8% of budget1 VOTE COUNTS — $45,000 over 3y, 6.1% of budgetAGUA PARA LA VIDA — $35,500 over 3y, 7.1% of budgetALIGHT — $34,250 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetREPRODUCTIVE HEALTH ACCESS PROJECT INC — $33,600 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetRAZOM INC — $26,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNEW NORTH CAROLINA PROJECT — $22,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetBVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE INC — $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetVERMONT ADAPTIVE SKI AND SPORTS — $20,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetSTEPS TO END DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INC — $15,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetNOISE FOR NOW — $12,000 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetNEW VOICES PITTSBURGH INC — $12,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetLAST PRISONER PROJECT — $11,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetINTERVALE CENTER INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetInstituto Lab — $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetABORTION CARE NETWORK — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCLEAN THE WORLD FOUNDATION INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGEDAKINA INC — $10,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetTHE VERMONT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget1 FOR THE PLANET INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCANDID — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE WATERWHEEL FOUNDATION — $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBlack Voters Matter Fund Inc — $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTIDES CENTER — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDESTINATION INNOVATION INC — $10,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetHIGH FIVES NONPROFIT FOUNDATION — $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAPPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY COLLABORATIVE — $8,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetLGBT Detroit — $8,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC — $7,665 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGEORGIA CONSERVATION VOTERS ED FUND — $7,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetAunt Dot's Place Inc — $7,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetMAINE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION — $7,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budget1HOOD MEDIA ACADEMY INC — $7,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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.

Tides FoundationNew Venture FundBoston Foundation IncNational Life Group C…Ben & Jerry's Foundat…Clif Family FoundationBvm Capacity Building…The Vermont Community…Maine Community Found…Amalgamated Charitabl…Rockefeller Philanthr…Impactassetsinc
Tides FoundationCA22.9× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tides Foundation · New Venture Fund · Boston Foundation Inc · National Life Group Charitable Foundation Inc · Ben & Jerry's Foundation Inc · Clif Family Foundation · Bvm Capacity Building Institute Inc · The Vermont Community Foundation · Maine Community Foundation Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Impactassetsinc

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 White Swan Foundation Inc 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%1%4%8%15%your share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
  • Steps to End Domestic Violence Inc — 71% of income from government
  • Intervale Center Inc — 13% of income from government
  • Vermont Adaptive Ski and Sports — 11% of income from government
  • Clean the World Foundation Inc — 0% of income from government
  • The Vermont Community Foundation — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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 35 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 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

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
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