Skip to content
Basalt Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Basalt Foundation Inc

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.

$12k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$4k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Food & Nutrition$39kInternational$17kHousing & Shelter$14kHuman Services$10kScience & Tech$8kEducation$5kPublic Safety & Disaster$4kEnvironment$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$4,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$301k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FOOD & WATER WATCH$4,000
NEW ENERGY ECONOMY IN NEW MEXICO$4,000
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUNDS$3,000
DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS$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 (FY17–23, $19k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 34% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%INTERFAITH CARING MINISTRIES: $5k → 16%THE FOOD DEPOT: $4k → 12%THE FOOD DEPOT: $3k → 12%THE FOOD DEPOT: $3k → 12%BAY AREA TURNING POINT: $1k → 16%THE FOOD DEPOT: $3k → 12%THE FOOD DEPOT: $1k → 12%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
NY
MA
CA
CO
NM
DC
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.

75%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$81k · 13 repeat orgs$27k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +84% since the first grant, against +35% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
8

Total granted

$81k
$20k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+84%
+35%

Still filing today

62%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 7% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesInternationalHousing & ShelterEnvironmentOther
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

  • THE FOOD DEPOT
    5× · 2018–2022 · $12k · revenue +84%
  • The Houston Food Bank
    4× · 2017–2024 · $11k · revenue +107%
  • EF
    Electronic Frontier Foundation Inc
    3× · 2018–2022 · $8k · revenue +36%

Funded once

  • IC
    INTERFAITH CARING MINISTRIES INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +78%
  • HH
    Houston Habitat for Humanity Inc
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +7%
  • FW
    FRESH WATER WATCH
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
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
United Food Bank

United Food Bank unites communities to alleviate hunger.

Food & Nutrition
2
Feeding San Diego

On a mission to connect every person facing hunger with nutritious meals by maximizing food rescue. through direct service and community partnerships, feeding san diego provides more than 26 million meals each year to children, families,…

Food & Nutrition
3
Second Harvest Food Bank Santa Cruz County

Second harvest food bank's mission is to end hunger and malnutrition by educating and involving the community.

Food & Nutrition
4
Hollywood Food Coalition

Hollywood food coalition welcomes people to dinner each night. we rescue and redistribute food daily to other organizations. we care for our immediate community through our wellness program. we build community with and through our…

—
5
Interfaith Food Ministry Nevada County

A community where no one should feel the hurt of hunger. Interfaith Food Ministry feeds the hungry and works to reduce food insecurity in Nevada County. We help to sustain health, human dignity and the opportunity for individuals to…

Food & Nutrition
6
Foodshot Global Inc

Accelerate the transformation to a healthy, sustainable and equitable food system.

Food & Nutrition
7
High Plains Food Bank

The High Plains Food Bank exists to help solve the issue of hunger and food insecurity in the Texas Panhandle.

—
8
Wedontwaste Inc

We Dont Waste increases food access and protects the planet by rescuing and repurposing food, while educating and advocating to increase food security and decrease food waste.

Food & Nutrition
9
Habitat for Humanity of La Plata County Inc

To build decent, affordable homes in partnership with families in need.

—
10
Food Bank of West Central Texas

To procure and distribute nutritional food to qualified agencies that feed the hungry of West Central Texas.

Food & Nutrition
11
Second Chance Foods Inc

Second Chance Foods (SCF or the Organization) is dedicated to reducing food waste by rescuing food that would otherwise be discarded, reducing hunger on a local basis while elevating the health of those served by the program, and reducing…

Food & Nutrition
12
Food Forward Inc

Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Santa Fe Habitat for Humanity; the most unlike its peers is The Houston Food Bank. 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

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 24 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
10/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

The Houston Food Bank: $11,150 · OtherThe Houston Food BankElectronic Frontier Foundation Inc: $7,750 · OtherElectronic Frontier Foundation IncENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS: $7,250 · OtherENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERSFOOD & WATER WATCH: $6,750 · OtherFOOD & WATER WATCHKITCHEN ANGELS INC: $6,250 · OtherKITCHEN ANGELS INCSANTA FE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $6,000 · OtherSANTA FE HABITAT FOR HUMANITYCOMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS: $4,500 · OtherCOMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLSNEW ENERGY ECONOMY IN NEW MEXICO: $4,000 · OtherNEW ENERGY ECONOMY IN NEW MEXICOSOLACE CENTER: $3,500 · OtherFRESH WATER WATCH: $3,000 · OtherTHE AMERICAN RED CROSS: $2,500 · Other+3 more: $4,400 · Other+3 moreTHE FOOD DEPOT: $12,250 · Human ServicesTHE FOOD DEPOTINTERFAITH CARING MINISTRIES INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesINTERFAITH CARING …Bay Area Turning Point Inc: $1,400 · Human ServicesBay Area Turning P…MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $7,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SA…LOS ALAMOS STUDY GROUP: $3,000 · InternationalLOS ALAMOS …WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $1,500 · InternationalWORLD CENTR…Houston Habitat for Humanity Inc: $5,000 · Housing & ShelterSAINT ELIZABETH SHELTER CORPORATION: $3,000 · Housing & ShelterFOOD & WATER WATCH: $4,000 · Food & NutritionENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $3,000 · Environment
Other$67,050Human Services$18,650International$11,500Housing & Shelter$8,000Food & Nutrition$4,000Environment$3,000

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 budgetTHE FOOD DEPOT: $12,250 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetThe Houston Food Bank: $11,150 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetElectronic Frontier Foundation Inc: $7,750 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $7,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetKITCHEN ANGELS INC: $6,250 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetSANTA FE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $6,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetINTERFAITH CARING MINISTRIES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetHouston Habitat for Humanity Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOOD & WATER WATCH: $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAINT ELIZABETH SHELTER CORPORATION: $3,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLOS ALAMOS STUDY GROUP: $3,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBay Area Turning Point Inc: $1,400 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.

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.

Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Vanguard Charitable Endowment ProgramPA8.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Basalt Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Basalt Foundation Inc. 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%4%8%11%15%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 · 0–15%
    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 24 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 Basalt’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