Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Ashoka

The creation of an association of the world's leading social entrepreneurs - men and women with system-changing solutions for the world's most urgent social problems - and fostering a global culture of everyone being a changemaker for the good of all.

$7.6M
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$2.1M
Largest
01What you fund
0198% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172024.

Youth Development$2.1MHousing & Shelter$153kEnvironment$100kEducation$98kCommunity Improvement$69kInternational$65kAnimals$50kEmployment$30kOther$0
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 1 grants below total $2,108,294 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $7,642,803 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $5,534,509 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.

$2,108,294
Median grant
1
States reached
$97M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
YOUTH VENTURE INC$2,108,294
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 (FY18–21, $30k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%GET AMERICA WORKING: $20k → 7%GET AMERICA WORKING: $10k → 7%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

WA
MT
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
OR
CA
CO
MO
VA
MD
TN
NC
DC
HI
GA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region — $4.6M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 8 regions, $2.5M to organizations and $2.1M to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$2.1M · 45% · 83 grants · 40 people

Stated purpose: AWARDS · Fellow Stipends

Sub-Saharan Africa$1.7M · 37% · 12 grants · 19 people

Stated purpose: AWARDS · Fellow Stipends

Middle East and North Africa$338k · 7% · 12 grants · 6 people

Stated purpose: AWARDS · Fellow Stipends

South America$178k · 4% · 2 grants · 34 people

Stated purpose: AWARDS · Fellow Stipends

South Asia$158k · 3% · 1 grant · 4 people

Stated purpose: AWARDS · Fellow Stipends

East Asia and the Pacific$85k · 2% · 1 grant · 12 people

Stated purpose: AWARDS · Fellow Stipends

North America (Canada and Mexico)$61k · 1% · 1 grant · 3 people

Stated purpose: Fellow Stipends

Central America and the Caribbean$13k · 0% · 1 person

Stated purpose: Fellow Stipends

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.

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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$2.4M · 6 repeat orgs$376k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +336% since the first grant, against +19% for the ones you funded once.

6 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
27

Total granted

$2.4M
$376k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+336%
+19%

Still filing today

83%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationHousing & ShelterInternationalCommunity ImprovementYouth DevelopmentCrime & LegalOther

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

  • YV
    YOUTH VENTURE INC
    2× · 2017–2024 · $2.1M · revenue +531% · 75% of their budget
  • FI
    FABSCRAP INC
    2× · 2018–2019 · $50k · revenue +336%
  • GA
    GET AMERICA WORKING INC
    2× · 2018–2021 · $30k · revenue +474% · 65% of their budget

Funded once

  • VI
    VETERINARY INITIATIVE FOR ENDANGERED WILDLIFE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $50k · revenue +553% · 44% of their budget
  • NI
    NEST INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $36k · revenue +309%
  • PO
    PROJECT ON ORGANIZING DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION AND RESEARCH LTD
    one grant, 2017 · $29k · revenue -38%

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
Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation

The neighborhood reinvestment corporation (d.b.a neighborworks america) is a congressionally chartered public non-profit corporation that creates opportunities for people to live in affordable homes, improve their lives, and strengthen…

2
Enterprise Community Investment Inc

All our efforts support our strategic goals to increase housing supply, advance racial equity and build resilience and upward mobility.the organization raises private capital through investment and by forming effective partnerships.…

Housing & Shelter
3
Coop Careers Inc

Building a movement of diverse, upwardly mobile college grads overcoming underemployment through digital skills and peer connections.

Education
4
Open Markets Institute

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.

Education
5
Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation

Pidc plans and implements economic development initiatives (see schedule o) which enhance the competitive environment, generate jobs and produce higher tax ratables throughout philadelphia.

Community Improvement
6
Miami-Dade Innovation Authority Inc

Miami-dade innovation authority bridges the gap between private innovators and the public sector to fast track innovation that improves quality of life for miamians.

Science & Tech
7
Mid-City Community Advocacy Network

Mid-city community advocacy network works to build a safe, productive, and healthy community for the residents of city heights and greater san diego through collaboration, advocacy, and organizing.

Community Improvement
8
Housing Partnership Development Corporation

Housing partnership development corporation functions to provide available low and moderate cost housing in the new york metro area through new housing production, preservation, rehabilitation, as well as the revitalization and…

Housing & Shelter
9
Design Impact

Design impact as a non-profit social innovation firm, empowers communities, organizations and systems to innovate on their current practices and tackle seemingly unsolvable problems through a creative and inclusive lens.

Human Services
10
Atlanta Neighborhood Development Partnership Inc

To develop, finance, and advocate for affordable housing at scale that promotes racial equity and healthy communities where families thrive.

Housing & Shelter
11
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
12
Latino Corporate Directors Association

Lcda serves as an advocate and resource to corporate boards, search firms, private equity, and institutional investors interested in gaining access to exceptional latino board talent.

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Enterprise Community Partners Inc and the most unlike its peers is Good Call Nyc. 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 backsteadyAffordable Housing Developm…Domestic Violence Crisis Se…Education Equity LeadershipNative Hawaiian Community D…Faith-Based Liberal Arts Co…Legal Aid & Immigration Ser…Wildlife Rehabilitation Cen…Environmental Advocacy Orga…
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 19 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number23%0%<5yr14%25%5–10yr18%29%10–20yr14%13%20–35yr15%17%35–55yr15%17%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value23%0%<5yr14%6%5–10yr18%9%10–20yr14%81%20–35yr15%2%35–55yr15%2%55yr+

The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 3% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
3%1/34
the rest of the field
13%
6,446/50,434

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

25 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. 25 of the 34 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
24/25
Grantees still filing
16/25
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

YOUTH VENTURE INC — $2,115,294 · Youth DevelopmentYOUTH VENTURE INCWITH — $17,500 · OtherWITHGreater Milwaukee Committee for Community Development — $17,500 · OtherGreater M…MIAMI DADE COLLEGE — $16,000 · OtherMIAMI DAD…REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT SAN DIEGO — $16,000 · OtherREGENTS O…GARY VENTURES INC — $10,000 · OtherPORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY — $10,000 · OtherIDEA 2 FORM LLC — $9,426 · OtherGET AMERICA WORKING INC — $30,000 · OtherGET AMERI…ENTERPRISE COMMUNITY PARTNERS INC — $17,500 · OtherENTERPRIS…Good Call NYC — $16,032 · OtherGood Call…MEDIC MOBILE INC — $8,000 · Other+8 more — $59,253 · Other+8 morePARITY BALTIMORE INCORPORATED — $100,000 · Housing & ShelterThe Works Inc — $10,000 · Housing & ShelterFAMILY HOUSING FUND — $10,000 · Housing & ShelterHOUSTON COMMUNITY LAND TRUST — $10,000 · Housing & ShelterRECYCLE ACROSS AMERICA — $50,000 · EducationKULANIAKEA — $12,500 · EducationEMPOWERED — $12,145 · EducationTRUCKERS AGAINST TRAFFICKING — $11,769 · EducationNorth Central College — $10,000 · EducationDUKE UNIVERSITY — $10,000 · EducationNEST INC — $35,806 · InternationalPROJECT ON ORGANIZING DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION AND RESEARCH LTD — $29,422 · InternationalVETERINARY INITIATIVE FOR ENDANGERED WILDLIFE INC — $50,000 · AnimalsFABSCRAP INC — $50,000 · Environment
Youth Development$2,115,294Other$227,211Housing & Shelter$130,000Education$106,414International$65,228Animals$50,000Environment$50,000

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 budgetYOUTH VENTURE INC — $2,115,294 over 2y, 75% of budgetPARITY BALTIMORE INCORPORATED — $100,000 over 2y, 5.7% of budgetVETERINARY INITIATIVE FOR ENDANGERED WILDLIFE INC — $50,000 over 1y, 44% of budgetRECYCLE ACROSS AMERICA — $50,000 over 2y, 4.9% of budgetFABSCRAP INC — $50,000 over 2y, 8.1% of budgetNEST INC — $35,806 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetGET AMERICA WORKING INC — $30,000 over 2y, 65% of budgetPROJECT ON ORGANIZING DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION AND RESEARCH LTD — $29,422 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetGreater Milwaukee Committee for Community Development — $17,500 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetENTERPRISE COMMUNITY PARTNERS INC — $17,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGood Call NYC — $16,032 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetKULANIAKEA — $12,500 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetTRUCKERS AGAINST TRAFFICKING — $11,769 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetThe Works Inc — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFAMILY HOUSING FUND — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNorth Central College — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDUKE UNIVERSITY — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHOUSTON COMMUNITY LAND TRUST — $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetMEDIC MOBILE INC — $8,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMETROPOLITAN TENANTS ORGANIZATION — $7,500 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCHICAGO AREA FAIR HOUSING ALLIANCE — $7,500 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION — $6,753 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.

The Chicago Community TrustIL9.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Chicago Community Trust · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Ashoka 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 · 00%5%19%42%75%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 11%
  • Enterprise Community Partners Inc22% of income from government
  • Parity Baltimore Incorporated11% of income from government
  • Truckers Against Trafficking0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
3report 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, 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 Ashoka?

Find your warmest path to Ashoka 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 34 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