· Private foundation
Avon Products Foundation Inc
THE MISSION OF THE FOUNDATION IS TO HELP IMPROVE THE LIVES OF WOMEN WORLDWIDE.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION | $2,663,502 |
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 US giving — 61% of grant dollars ($4.3M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 39% that went abroad ($2.7M) is mapped below.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–21) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 63% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
Beyond the US — 39% of all-years giving ($2.7M)
1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 17% of Avon Products Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +62% since the first grant, against +49% for the ones you funded once.
8 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2023, 7 since wound down.
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 FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
SCHOLARSHIP AMERICA INC3× · 2017–2019 · $1.0M · revenue +37%
VITAL VOICES GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP INC2× · 2019–2020 · $700k · revenue +33%
WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC2× · 2017–2018 · $268k · revenue +62%
Funded once
- ISINTERNATIONAL SCHOLARSHIP AND TUITION SERVICES INCone grant, 2017 · $430k
- NDNATIONAL DOMESTIC VIOLENCE HOTLINEgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $388k · revenue +170%
- TMTHE MALALA FUNDone grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue +16%
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.
Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes. nyu's primary missions are education, research and scholarship, and patient care.
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.
Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.
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…
Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.
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…
The nstmf's mission is to build inclusive stem communities across the united states. fundamental to these communities are the significant, inspirational connections we foster between the individuals who have received national recognition…
Sanford burnham prebys medical discovery institute's mission is to advance the biomedical sciences by cultivating the next generation of scientific leaders, providing meaningful opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to learn,…
Fred hutch cancer center ("fred hutch") unites innovative research and compassionate care to prevent and eliminate cancer and infectious disease. continued on schedule o
Aahi is a nonprofit biotech research institute, bringing together the best experts, technologies, and platforms to create accessible, high-quality products and solutions for harnessing the immune system to alleviate disease.
Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…
The mission of lowell observatory is to pursue the study of astronomy, especially the study of our solar system and its evolution; to conduct pure research in astronomical phenomena; and to maintain quality public education and outreach…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Girl Scouts of Northern New Jersey and the most unlike its peers is Wildlife in Crisis Inc. 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 39 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% 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.
32 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 32 of the 37 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 SCHOLARSHIP AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
- Who funds VITAL VOICES GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL DOMESTIC VIOLENCE HOTLINE ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE MALALA FUND ↗
- Who funds University of Massachusetts Dartmouth Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE BROOKLYN INSTITUTE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES ↗
- Who funds Disabled American Veterans (DAV) Charitable Service Trust ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF MUSKINGUM PERRY AND MORGAN COUNTIES INC ↗
- Who funds Torrance Memorial Medical Center Health Care Foundation ↗
- Who funds MEMPHIS CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER ↗
- Who funds WILLIAM J BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE INC ↗
- Who funds MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF THE HUDSON VALLEY ↗
- Who funds Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds Daraja Education Fund ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds University of Miami ↗
- Who funds GOD'S LOVE WE DELIVER INC ↗
- Who funds DUKE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds WILDLIFE IN CRISIS INC ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds BREAKTHROUGH T1D ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN LEBANESE SYRIAN ASSOCIATED CHARITIES INC ↗
- Who funds BIOBUS INC ↗
- Who funds JERSEYSTEM INC ↗
- Who funds GIRL SCOUTS HEART OF THE HUDSON INC ↗
- Who funds GIRL SCOUTS OF NORTHERN NEW JERSEY ↗
- Who funds Beyond Benign Inc ↗
- Who funds LIBERTY SCIENCE CENTER ↗
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 Pfizer Foundation Inc · Chubb Charitable Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Jewish Communal Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Network for Good · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust 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 Avon Products 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Liberty Science Center — 14% of income from government
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- University of Miami — 5% of income from government
- Beyond Benign 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.