Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Ww Good Foundation Inc

Ww good foundation, inc.

$796k
Granted FY2022
18
Grants FY2022
11
States reached
$525k
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 FY20192022.

Food & Nutrition$5.2MPhilanthropy$220kInternational$86kRecreation & Sports$85kHealth$71kCivil Rights$62kEducation$22kHuman Services$13k
02FY2022 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2022

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k14 grants · $252k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $86k
  • $250k+1 grant · $525k
$17,116
Median grant
11
States reached
$244k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Feeding America$524,680
WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INCORPORATED$86,344
CH8SING WATERFALLS$44,872
MIWRC$34,996
Hike Clerb Inc$24,000
SISTA AFYA COMMUNITY CARE NFP$20,000
CITY HARVEST$19,174
BORDERLAND RAINBOW CENTER$18,540
Headstrong$17,116
SAPNA NYC INC$12,700
FOOD RECOVERY NETWORK$10,814
GROW ORLANDO INC$10,000
THE NOTAH BEGAY III FOUNDATION$10,000
LA SEMILLA FOOD CENTER$10,000
ACTIVE PLUS$10,000
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 (FY21–22, $33k) land where the poverty rate runs at 28%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Full Hearts Full Bellies: $20k → 28%SAPNA NYC INC: $13k → 28%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

MN
IL
NY
PA
CT
CA
VA
MD
NM
DC
GA
TX
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.

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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$5.1M · 4 repeat orgs$552k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +40% since the first grant, against -4% for the ones you funded once.

4 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2022, 1 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
7

Total granted

$5.1M
$242k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+40%
-4%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 64% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $310k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22
Food & NutritionRecreation & SportsHealthHuman ServicesCivil RightsEnvironmentOther

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

  • Feeding America
    3× · 2020–2022 · $2.2M · revenue +40%
  • HS
    HEAD STRONG PROJECT INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $51k · revenue +26%
  • BR
    BORDERLAND RAINBOW CENTER
    2× · 2021–2022 · $27k · revenue +51%

Funded once

  • TN
    THE NEW YORK TIMES COMMUNITIES FUND
    one grant, 2020 · $150k · revenue +12%
  • FB
    FULL BELLIES INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $20k · revenue +120% · 26% of their budget
  • HISPANICS IN PHILANTHROPY
    one grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue -79%

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
Fair Food Network Inc

Fair food network is organized to grow community health, wealth, and resilience through food, to increase access to affordable healthy food, help local food economies thrive and build resilience in local food and agriculture systems.

Food & Nutrition
2
Food Forward Inc

Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.

Food & Nutrition
3
Berkeley Food Network

The berkeley food network (bfn) works to expand food assistance services to food-insecure berkeley residents. bfn was founded in 2016 to help establish a foundation of good health from which all berkeley residents can pursue opportunity by…

Food & Nutrition
4
Nashville Food Project Inc

The nashville food project brings people together to grow, cook, and share nourishing food, with the goals of cultivating community and alleviating hunger in our city.

Food & Nutrition
5
The Global FoodBanking Network

To nourish the world's hungry through uniting and advancing food banks.

International
6
Food and Planet

The mission of Food & Planet is to empower nutrition professionals to advance sustainable food systems through our programs and resources. Over the past year, we have engaged with partners to develop several key resources and learning…

Food & Nutrition
7
Foodwise Community

Foodwise grows thriving communities through the power and joy of local food. We envision a world that nourishes all people, local economies, and the living earth.

8
Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition

The mission of the global alliance for improved nutrition (gain) is to improve the consumption of healthier diets for all, especially the most vulnerable, by improving the availability, affordability, desirability, and sustainability of…

Food & Nutrition
9
Second Harvest of Silicon Valley

To realize our vision of a hunger free community we will provide more food, healthy food and better access to food. we will leverage our own resources and also work with partners in the community.

Food & Nutrition
10
Food Bank for New York City

Food bank for nyc has been the city's major hunger-relief organization driven by our mission to empower every new yorker to achieve food security for good. we harness the collective power of our network of food providers, partners, and…

Community Improvement
11
Foodbank of Santa Barbara County Inc

To end hunger and transform the health of our community by providing nourishment to those in need by acquiring and distributing safe nutritious food via local agencies and by providing education to solve hunger and nutritional problems in…

Food & Nutrition
12
The Food Bank for Larimer County

To provide food to all in need through community partnerships and hunger relief programs. Our vision is a hunger-free Larimer County.

Food & Nutrition

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is La Semilla Food Center and the most unlike its peers is Borderland Rainbow Center. 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 backsteadyFood Banks and PantriesCommunity FoundationsLgbtq+ Community SupportAddiction Recovery ServicesLocal Food System Organizat…Youth Sports ProgramsImmigrant Worker Support
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 16 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%8%<5yr14%12%5–10yr19%42%10–20yr16%12%20–35yr13%19%35–55yr16%8%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%1%<5yr14%1%5–10yr19%53%10–20yr16%1%20–35yr13%40%35–55yr16%4%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 8% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 4% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
4%1/27
the rest of the field
13%
240,395/1,819,538

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.

04the grantee network

26 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. 26 of the 27 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
26/26
Grantees still filing
13/26
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

WHOLESOME WAVE INC — $2,811,555 · EnvironmentWHOLESOME WAVE INCFeeding America — $2,224,752 · Food & NutritionFeeding America+7 more — $86,913 · Food & NutritionTHE NEW YORK TIMES COMMUNITIES FUND — $150,000 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY WORLDWIDE — $50,000 · Philanthropy+1 more — $5,912 · PhilanthropyWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC — $86,344 · InternationalCH8SING WATERFALLS - EMBR8CE THE CH8SE — $44,872 · Recreation & SportsHIKE CLERB INC — $24,000 · Recreation & SportsTHE NOTAH BEGAY III FOUNDATION INC — $10,000 · Recreation & SportsHEAD STRONG PROJECT INC — $50,658 · HealthSISTA AFYA COMMUNITY CARE NFP — $20,000 · HealthMINNESOTA INDIAN WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER — $34,996 · OtherHISPANICS IN PHILANTHROPY — $20,000 · OtherGROW ORLANDO INC — $10,000 · OtherBORDERLAND RAINBOW CENTER — $26,950 · OtherGLSEN INC — $15,000 · OtherFULL BELLIES INC — $20,002 · OtherSAPNA NYC INC — $12,700 · OtherFoodWhat Incorporated — $10,000 · OtherBackyard Basecamp Inc — $6,690 · Other
Environment$2,811,555Food & Nutrition$2,311,665Philanthropy$205,912International$86,344Recreation & Sports$78,872Health$70,658Other$156,338

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 budgetWHOLESOME WAVE INC — $2,811,555 over 3y, 35% of budgetFeeding America — $2,224,752 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NEW YORK TIMES COMMUNITIES FUND — $150,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC — $86,344 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHEAD STRONG PROJECT INC — $50,658 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetUNITED WAY WORLDWIDE — $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMINNESOTA INDIAN WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER — $34,996 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetBORDERLAND RAINBOW CENTER — $26,950 over 2y, 4.0% of budgetFULL BELLIES INC — $20,002 over 1y, 26% of budgetSISTA AFYA COMMUNITY CARE NFP — $20,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetHISPANICS IN PHILANTHROPY — $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMINNIES FOOD PANTRY INC — $20,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCITY HARVEST INC — $19,174 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGLSEN INC — $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSAPNA NYC INC — $12,700 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetFOOD RECOVERY NETWORK INC — $10,814 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetLA SEMILLA FOOD CENTER — $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetFoodWhat Incorporated — $10,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetACTIVE PLUS INC — $10,000 over 1y, 7.4% of budgetTHE NOTAH BEGAY III FOUNDATION INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSECOND HARVEST FOODBANK OF NORTH CENTRAL OHIO — $9,317 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEATWELL EXCHANGE INC — $7,608 over 1y, 16% of budgetBackyard Basecamp Inc — $6,690 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetPLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND INC — $5,912 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Network for GoodDC7.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · 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 Ww Good 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 30%3%10%23%40%your share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Ww Good Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Ww Good Foundation Inc 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.

    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 27 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph