Skip to content

· Private foundation

Artemis Foundation Ltd

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$120k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$15k
Largest
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 2025.

Health$221kInternational$126kEnvironment$87kCivil Rights$30kCrime & Legal$25kPublic Benefit$13kEducation$6k
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $18k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $103k
$15,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PLANNED PARENTHOOD$15,000
PROJECT CURE$15,000
THE FISTUAL FOUNDATION$15,000
EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE$15,000
DIRECT RELIEF$15,000
WE CARE SOLAR$15,000
POPULATION ACTION INTERNATIONAL$12,500
UNDUE MEDICAL DEBT$5,000
REMOTE AREA MEDICAL$5,000
LIBERTY PRAIRIE$4,000
BRUSHWOOD CENTER AT RYERSON WOODS$3,500
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 (FY25–25, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%UNDUE MEDICAL DEBT: $5k → 13%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

IL
NY
CT
RI
CA
CO
AZ
TN
DC
AL
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.
04

Where the work is directed

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

About 30% of Artemis Foundation Ltd’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Artemis Foundation Ltdlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 33% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
$496k · 13 repeat orgs$10k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +22% since the first grant, against +12% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
1

Total granted

$496k
$2k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+12%

Still filing today

85%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthInternationalEnvironmentCrime & LegalEducationCivil RightsOther
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

  • BENEVOLENT HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION
    6× · 2020–2025 · $76k · revenue +63%
  • DIRECT RELIEF
    6× · 2020–2025 · $75k · revenue +20%
  • WC
    WE CARE SOLAR
    6× · 2020–2025 · $65k · revenue +103%

Funded once

  • O
    OPENLANDS
    one grant, 2021 · $2k · revenue +12%
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
Nature for Justice

To empower frontline communities to lead nature-based solutions that advance climate justice, ecosystem restoration, and resilient livelihoods through connecting locally-led initiatives to funding, markets, and technical support.

Environment
2
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
3
Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility

Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility engages the community to create a healthy, just, peaceful and sustainable world. We take on the gravest current threats to human health and survival -- nuclear weapons, economic inequity, and…

International
4
One Earth Philanthropy

One Earth's mission is to empower everyone, everywhere, with the knowledge, inspiration, and opportunity to heal the Earth and reclaim our future.

Environment
5
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
6
Red Lightning

Red Lightning offers a portfolio of scalable medical equity and disaster aid solutions for lower to middle income countries. We do this through partnerships with key organizations and subject matter experts to assess and design solutions…

Public Safety & Disaster
7
Project Hope - the People-to-People Health Foundation Inc

To conduct and support programs and activities aimed at solving some of the world's greatest public health challenges, with a specific focus on enabling health workers to have the greatest possible impact on the health of the people they…

International
8
Eden Peopleplanet

To offer the dignity of fair employment to people living in impoverished communities, who become transformational agents of global forest restoration.

International
9
Amazon Watch Inc

To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with Indigenous communities in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability, and the preservation of the Amazon Basin's…

Environment
10
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
11
Rainforest Foundation Inc

The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.

Environment
12
Nature and Culture International

Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is We Care Solar; the most unlike its peers is Liberty Prairie Nfp. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

14 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. 14 of the 16 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
9/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BENEVOLENT HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION: $75,800 · HealthBENEVOLENT HEALTHCARE FOUNDATIONWE CARE SOLAR: $65,000 · HealthWE CARE SOLARThe Fistula Foundation: $62,500 · HealthThe Fistula FoundationPOPULATION ACTION INTERNATIONAL: $50,500 · HealthPOPULATION ACTION INTERNATIONALDIRECT RELIEF: $75,000 · InternationalDIRECT RELIEFREMOTE AREA MEDICAL: $17,500 · InternationalREMOTE AREA MEDICALPLANNED PARENTHOOD: $60,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOODLIBERTY PRAIRIE NFP: $12,500 · OtherLIBERTY PRAIRIE NF…POLLEN CIRCLES INC: $9,000 · OtherPOLLEN CIRCLES INC+1 more: $1,500 · OtherSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $29,500 · Crime & LegalEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $25,000 · Civil RightsSOGOREA TE LAND TRUST: $8,000 · EnvironmentBRUSHWOOD CENTER AT RYERSON WOODS: $3,500 · EnvironmentCOOL LEARNING EXPERIENCE: $5,500 · EducationMEDICAL DEBT RESOLUTION INC: $5,000 · Human Services
Health$253,800International$92,500Other$83,000Crime & Legal$29,500Civil Rights$25,000Environment$11,500Education$5,500Human Services$5,000

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 budgetBENEVOLENT HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION: $75,800 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetDIRECT RELIEF: $75,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetWE CARE SOLAR: $65,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetThe Fistula Foundation: $62,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetPOPULATION ACTION INTERNATIONAL: $50,500 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $29,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $25,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetREMOTE AREA MEDICAL: $17,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetLIBERTY PRAIRIE NFP: $12,500 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetSOGOREA TE LAND TRUST: $8,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCOOL LEARNING EXPERIENCE: $5,500 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetMEDICAL DEBT RESOLUTION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBRUSHWOOD CENTER AT RYERSON WOODS: $3,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetOPENLANDS: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds BENEVOLENT HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds DIRECT RELIEF ↗
  • Who funds WE CARE SOLAR ↗
  • Who funds The Fistula Foundation ↗
  • Who funds POPULATION ACTION INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
  • Who funds REMOTE AREA MEDICAL ↗
  • Who funds LIBERTY PRAIRIE NFP ↗
  • Who funds SOGOREA TE LAND TRUST ↗
  • Who funds COOL LEARNING EXPERIENCE ↗
  • Who funds MEDICAL DEBT RESOLUTION INC ↗
  • Who funds BRUSHWOOD CENTER AT RYERSON WOODS ↗
  • Who funds OPENLANDS ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO5.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Artemis Foundation Ltd funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Artemis Foundation Ltd. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 16 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Artemis Foundation Ltd’s filings →

    More from the funding graph