· Private foundation
Xactlyone Foundation
Its FY2026 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2026.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2026
- Under $10k15 grants · $25k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $115k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN | $20,000 |
| NATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS | $20,000 |
| WORLD WILDLIFE FUND | $20,000 |
| FEEDING AMERICA | $20,000 |
| BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF AMERICA | $20,000 |
| KINDKART | $15,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,500 |
| AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION - GEATER CINCINNATI GO RED FOR WOMEN | $2,500 |
| DENVER FOOD RESCUE | $2,500 |
| DENVER SANTA CLAUS SHOP | $2,500 |
| SANTA'S HELPERS FOUNDATIOIN | $2,500 |
| OURAY MOUNTAIN SEARCH AND RESCUE | $2,000 |
| CHALLENGED ATHLETES FOUNDATION | $2,000 |
| AMERICAN DIABETES ASSOCIATION | $1,500 |
| ALS ASSOCIATION | $1,500 |
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 (FY17–26, $36k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 47% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +31% since the first grant, against +3% for the ones you funded once.
21 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2026, 17 since wound down; 16 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (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 FY2026, 18% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $114k 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
- CCODEORG3× · 2018–2025 · $27k · revenue +26%
Best Buddies International Inc4× · 2017–2022 · $11k · revenue +81%- APA PRECIOUS CHILD INC3× · 2017–2020 · $7k · revenue +32%
Funded once
- CFCENTER FOR DISEASE DYNAMICS ECONOMICS & POLICY INCone grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -6%
GARY SINISE FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +47%- CHCraig Hospital Foundationgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $6k · revenue +65%
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.
Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.
Susan g. komen has an unmatched, comprehensive 360-degree approach to fighting breast cancer across all fronts and supporting millions of people in the u.s. and in countries worldwide. we advocate for policies to protect patients, drive…
Our mission is to break down barriers to als research to find effective treatments. by uniting academia, the pharma and biotech industry, government, venture capital, related nonprofits, and the als community, we aim to overcome the…
City of Hope's mission is to make hope a reality for all touched by cancer and diabetes. PLEASE SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A CONTINUATION OF OUR MISSION
The mission of dfci is to provide expert, compassionate, and equitable care to children, adults, and their families, while advancing the understanding, diagnosis, treatment, cure, and prevention of cancer and related diseases. we train new…
The Academy's mission is to enhance member career fulfillment and promote brain health for all.
See attached statementprimary missionfuture 500 builds trust between corporations, advocates, investors, and philanthropists to advance business as a force for good. we are experts in stakeholder engagement with over 25 years of experience…
Our mission is to accelerate scientific progress, understand the root causes of disease, and narrow the gap between discoveries and impact on patients.
The mission of the ceo roundtable on cancer is to make continual progress toward the elimination of cancer as a personal disease and public health problem through initiatives that reduce the risk of cancer, enable early diagnosis,…
Activate empowers scientists to reinvent the world by bringing their research to market. activate partners with u.s. based funders, research institutions, and other pillars of the hard technology community to help entrepreneurial…
Water.org's goal is to bring safe water and sanitation to the world through access to small, affordable loans.
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Girls Who Code Inc and the most unlike its peers is Santas Helpers 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.
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 27 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
73 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 73 of the 142 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 CODEORG ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds NAMI National ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN INC ↗
- Who funds KINDKART INC ↗
- Who funds Best Buddies International Inc ↗
- Who funds MOVEMBER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR DISEASE DYNAMICS ECONOMICS & POLICY INC ↗
- Who funds GARY SINISE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds A PRECIOUS CHILD INC ↗
- Who funds Craig Hospital Foundation ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds GIRLS ON THE RUN OF THE ROCKIES ↗
- Who funds SACRED HEART COMMUNITY SERVICE ↗
- Who funds BACK ON MY FEET ↗
- Who funds Silicon Valley Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds CONNECT TO COMPETE INC ↗
- Who funds Girls Leadership Institute Inc dba Girls Leadership ↗
- Who funds GIRLS WHO CODE INC ↗
- Who funds Harbor House of Central Florida Inc ↗
- Who funds NEPHCURE KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL 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: The Denver Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · The Colorado Health Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Rose Community Foundation · San Jose Mercury News Wish Book Fund Inc · The Anschutz Foundation · Tides Foundation · Anschutz Family Foundation · Daniels Fund · El Pomar Foundation · Mile High United Way 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 Xactlyone 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.
- Special Olympics Connecticut Inc — 42% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Harbor House of Central Florida Inc — 24% of income from government
- Center for Disease Dynamics Economics & Policy Inc — 16% of income from government
- Best Buddies International Inc — 4% of income from government
- Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc — 0% 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 Xactlyone Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Xactlyone Foundation 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.