Skip to content
Aditi Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Aditi Foundation

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.

$5.4M
Granted FY2024still arriving
19
Grants FY2024still arriving
15
States reached
$2.0M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Philanthropy$29MHuman Services$13MCivil Rights$2.3MEducation$1.4MReligion$900kSocial Science$300k
02FY2024 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $110k
  • $50k–250k12 grants · $1.5M
  • $250k+4 grants · $3.8M
$140,000
Median grant
15
States reached
$4.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NEO PHILANTHROPY$2,000,000
JEANNETTE RANKIN FOUNDATION$1,100,000
THE NEW YORK WOMEN'S FOUNDATION$400,000
WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF CALIFORNIA$300,000
WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF MINNESOTA$200,000
ESPERANZA UNITED$180,000
WOMEN'S FOUNDATION FOR A GREATER MEMPHIS$180,000
ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS$170,000
IOWA WOMENS FOUNDATION$160,000
WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF COLORADO$140,000
NEW MEXICO FUND FOR WOMEN AND GIRLS$115,000
A CALL TO MEN$100,000
WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF ALABAMA$90,000
WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF THE SOUTH$85,000
WOMEN'S FUND OF GREATER OMAHA INC$50,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY20–24, $14.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%WOMEN'S FUND OF WESTERN MASSACHUSETTS: $45k → 16%WOMEN'S FUND OF WESTERN MASSACHUSETTS: $275k → 17%WOMEN'S FUND OF GREATER OMAHA INC: $250k → 12%CASA DE ESPERANZA: $1.1M → 14%WASHINGTON AREA WOMEN'S FOUNDATION: $250k → 14%IOWA WOMENS FOUNDATION: $475k → 15%WOMEN'S FOUNDATION FOR A GREATER MEMPHIS: $1.2M → 17%WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF MISSISSIPPI: $275k → 23%WOMEN'S FUND OF WESTERN MASSACHUSETTS: $200k → 17%WOMEN'S FUND OF GREATER OMAHA INC: $250k → 12%CASA DE ESPERANZA: $800k → 14%WASHINGTON AREA WOMEN'S FOUNDATION: $250k → 14%IOWA WOMENS FOUNDATION: $200k → 15%WOMEN'S FOUNDATION FOR A GREATER MEMPHIS: $1.0M → 17%WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF MISSISSIPPI: $200k → 23%WOMEN'S FUND OF GREATER OMAHA INC: $50k → 12%CASA DE ESPERANZA: $600k → 14%IOWA WOMENS FOUNDATION: $160k → 15%WOMEN'S FOUNDATION FOR A GREATER MEMPHIS: $750k → 17%WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF MISSISSIPPI: $45k → 23%CASA DE ESPERANZA: $250k → 14%THE NEW YORK WOMEN'S FOUNDATION: $1.8M → 17%WOMEN'S FOUNDATION FOR A GREATER MEMPHIS: $750k → 17%ESPERANZA UNITED: $180k → 14%THE NEW YORK WOMEN'S FOUNDATION: $1.0M → 17%WASHINGTON AREA WOMEN'S FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%WOMEN'S FOUNDATION FOR A GREATER MEMPHIS: $180k → 17%THE NEW YORK WOMEN'S FOUNDATION: $875k → 17%THE NEW YORK WOMEN'S FOUNDATION: $500k → 17%THE NEW YORK WOMEN'S FOUNDATION: $400k → 17%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

MN
IL
NY
MA
IA
CA
CO
NE
AZ
NM
TN
NC
DC
HI
LA
MS
AL
GA
TX
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$36M · 20 repeat orgs$750k to everyone else

20 repeat relationships: 16 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
2

Total granted

$36M
$750k

Still filing today

95%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
Human ServicesCivil RightsPhilanthropyPublic BenefitCommunity ImprovementOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • NEO Philanthropy Inc
    3× · 2022–2024 · $7.0M · revenue +28%
  • WF
    WOMEN'S FOUNDATION FOR A GREATER MEMPHIS
    5× · 2020–2024 · $3.9M · revenue +342% · 39% of their budget
  • EU
    ESPERANZA UNITED
    5× · 2020–2024 · $2.9M · revenue +304%

Funded once

  • RP
    ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS FISCAL SPONSOR FOR GRANTMAKERS FOR GIRLS
    one grant, 2020 · $500k
  • RP
    ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS FISCAL SPONSOR FOR A CALL TO MEN
    one grant, 2020 · $250k
How this is measured

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

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Women's Fund of Rhode Island

Invests in women and girls through research, advocacy, grant making and strategic partnerships designed to achieve gender equity through systemic change.

Human Services
2
Womens Foundation of Oregon

Women's foundation of oregon supports communities, programs, and individuals that improve the lives and opportunities of women and girls. we do this through direct grants, research, and policy advocacy.

—
3
Womens Way

Formed in the late-70's, WOMEN'S WAY achieves gender equity by building collective power to disrupt oppressive systems and strengthen alternative models centered in love, dignity, and liberation.

Human Services
4
Washington Women's Foundation

Washington women's foundation is a strong and inclusive collective of informed women who together influence community transformation through individual and collective discovery, high-impact grant making and by listening to and respecting…

Philanthropy
5
Womens Global Empowerment Fund

The mission of Women's Global Empowerment Fund is to empower women through economic, social and political programs; creating opportunities while addressing inequality, strengthening families and communities. Our strategy is to provide…

International
6
Womens Funding Network

Our mission as a global alliance is to provide strategies, research, and resources that support the critical agency and influence of women's foundations and gender justice funders in the movement for equality, justice, and power for all.

Education
7
Womens Impact Fund

Strengthen communities by maximizing womens leadership in philanthropy through collective giving, education and engagement.

Human Services
8
Women Empowering Women
Unclassified
9
Womens Executive Alliance
Philanthropy
10
Independent Women's Forum

Engage more individuals in the civic process, educate them about the impact of public policies on their lives and our economy, and build support for policies that empower individuals.

Civil Rights
11
Womens Fund of Smith County

The women's fund leverages the philanthropic capacity of women as a catalyst for positive change.

Philanthropy
12
Women's World Banking Inc

The mission of women's world banking is to expand the economicassets, participation and power of low-income women and theirhouseholds by helping them access financial services, knowledge andmarkets. for more information, see schedule o.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ms Foundation for Women Inc; the most unlike its peers is Esperanza United. 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

24 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 24 of the 27 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

8
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
24/24
Grantees still filing
16/24
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NEW YORK WOMEN'S FOUNDATION INC: $4,525,000 · Human ServicesNEW YORK WOMEN'S FOUNDATION INCWOMEN'S FOUNDATION FOR A GREATER MEMPHIS: $3,880,000 · Human ServicesWOMEN'S FOUNDATION FOR A GREATER MEMPHISESPERANZA UNITED: $2,930,000 · Human ServicesESPERANZA UNITEDTHE WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF COLORADO INC: $1,940,000 · Human ServicesTHE WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF COLORADO INCIOWA WOMEN'S FOUNDATION: $835,000 · Human Services+5 more: $2,590,000 · Human Services+5 moreWOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF CALIFORNIA: $2,800,000 · OtherWOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF CALI…Texas Women's Foundation: $2,000,000 · OtherTexas Women's FoundationNEW MEXICO FUND FOR WOMEN AND GIRLS: $1,790,000 · OtherNEW MEXICO FUND FOR WOMEN …THE JEANNETTE RANKIN FOUNDATION INC: $1,400,000 · OtherTHE JEANNETTE RANKIN FOUND…CHICAGO FOUNDATION FOR WOMEN: $1,000,000 · OtherCHICAGO FOUNDATION FOR WOM…A CALL TO MEN: $900,000 · OtherA CALL TO MENROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS FISCAL SPONSOR FOR GRANTMAKERS FOR GIRLS: $500,000 · Other+2 more: $550,000 · OtherNEO Philanthropy Inc: $7,000,000 · Public BenefitNEO Philanthropy…Women's Foundation of Minnesota: $3,000,000 · PhilanthropyWomen's Foundati…ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $2,120,000 · PhilanthropyROCKEFELLER PHIL…WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF ALABAMA: $1,590,000 · PhilanthropyWOMEN'S FOUNDATI…+1 more: $120,000 · PhilanthropyMS FOUNDATION FOR WOMEN INC: $2,300,000 · Civil RightsWOMENS FOUNDATION OF THE SOUTH: $1,260,000 · Civil RightsThe Womens Foundation for the State of Arizona: $1,950,000 · Community Improvement
Human Services$16,700,000Other$10,940,000Public Benefit$7,000,000Philanthropy$6,830,000Civil Rights$3,560,000Community Improvement$1,950,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNEO Philanthropy Inc: $7,000,000 over 3y, 2.1% of budgetNEW YORK WOMEN'S FOUNDATION INC: $4,525,000 over 5y, 11% of budgetWOMEN'S FOUNDATION FOR A GREATER MEMPHIS: $3,880,000 over 5y, 39% of budgetWomen's Foundation of Minnesota: $3,000,000 over 4y, 27% of budgetESPERANZA UNITED: $2,930,000 over 5y, 18% of budgetWOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF CALIFORNIA: $2,800,000 over 3y, 12% of budgetMS FOUNDATION FOR WOMEN INC: $2,300,000 over 4y, 24% of budgetROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $2,120,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTexas Women's Foundation: $2,000,000 over 3y, 12% of budgetThe Womens Foundation for the State of Arizona: $1,950,000 over 2y, 58% of budgetTHE WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF COLORADO INC: $1,940,000 over 4y, 11% of budgetNEW MEXICO FUND FOR WOMEN AND GIRLS: $1,790,000 over 4y, 39% of budgetWOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF ALABAMA: $1,590,000 over 5y, 21% of budgetTHE JEANNETTE RANKIN FOUNDATION INC: $1,400,000 over 2y, 55% of budgetWOMENS FOUNDATION OF THE SOUTH: $1,260,000 over 4y, 20% of budgetCHICAGO FOUNDATION FOR WOMEN: $1,000,000 over 2y, 9.8% of budgetIOWA WOMEN'S FOUNDATION: $835,000 over 3y, 39% of budgetWASHINGTON AREA WOMEN'S FOUNDATION: $550,000 over 3y, 17% of budgetWOMEN'S FUND OF GREATER OMAHA INC: $550,000 over 3y, 5.4% of budgetWOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF MISSISSIPPI: $520,000 over 3y, 27% of budgetWOMEN'S FUND OF WESTERN MASSACHUSETTS INC: $520,000 over 3y, 19% of budgetWOMEN'S FUND OF HAWAI'I: $450,000 over 4y, 26% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR WOMEN'S POLICY RESEARCH: $300,000 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetBOSTON WOMEN'S FUND INC: $120,000 over 2y, 4.2% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Womens Funding NetworkMs Foundation for Wom…New York Women's Foun…WK Kellogg FoundationNational Philanthropi…Amalgamated Charitabl…Novo FoundationThe Kresge FoundationTides FoundationRockefeller Philanthr…United Philanthropy F…The Bank of America C…
Womens Funding NetworkCA30.6× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Womens Funding Network · Ms Foundation for Women Inc · New York Women's Foundation Inc · WK Kellogg Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Novo Foundation · The Kresge Foundation · Tides Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · United Philanthropy Forum · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Aditi Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Aditi Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 27 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Aditi’s filings →

    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 endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home