· Private foundation
Bfk 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ANERA | $2,000 |
| COMMUNITY REFUGEE & IMMIGRATION SE | $2,000 |
| LICKING LAND TRUST | $2,000 |
| IF NOT NOW EDUCATION FUND | $2,000 |
| CENTER FOR JEWISH NONVIOLENCE | $2,000 |
| FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
| ASTRAEA LESBIAN FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
| VOTE SOLAR | $1,000 |
| COOL EARTH ACTION USA | $1,000 |
| WOMEN'S HEALTH PROJECT | $1,000 |
| FREEDOM FOR IMMIGRANTS | $1,000 |
| FOOD GATHERERS | $1,000 |
| AMERICAN FARMLAND TRUST | $1,000 |
| AMERICAN INDIAN COMMUNITY HOUSING T | $1,000 |
| AMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE | $1,000 |
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 human-services grants (FY17–25, $23k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 39% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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
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.
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.
58 repeat relationships — 36 still active in FY2025, 22 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
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 FY2025, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k 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
- LLLICKING LAND TRUST9× · 2017–2025 · $16k · revenue +94%
- CCCHICAGO COALITION TO END HOMELESSNESS6× · 2018–2023 · $14k · revenue +62%
- MEMICHIGAN ENVIROMENTAL COUNCIL9× · 2017–2025 · $14k · revenue +145%
Funded once
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +37%- AIAMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCILgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $2k · revenue +29%
- INIF NOT NOW MOVEMENTgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $2k · revenue +271%
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.
Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
The alliance for just deliberation on solar geoengineering (dsg) is a charitable, scientific and educational organization dedicated to building just and inclusive deliberation about research and potential use of solar geoengineering. solar…
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.
Climate catalyst sparks collective action to tackle the biggest climate challenges we face today: cutting emissions in heavy industries.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Namati, inc. (namati) is dedicated to putting the law in people's hands. we strive to build a just world, in which every one of us can take part in the decisions and demand accountability from the institutions that affect our lives.…
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…
To investigate, research, write, publish, present conferences and teach with respect to global, regional, transboundary, and comparative environmental issues and to make the findings from such activities available to the general public; to…
Climate group advances climate action by mobilizing business and government leadership to drive systemic decarbonization across energy, transport, and industry, while engaging the public through large-scale convenings and global platforms.…
To raise awareness about the potential to reduce environmental harm by shifting electricity use to particular times; to encourage the development and spread of common protocols for this practice.
To lead and coordinate the global initiative to address and prevent criminalization, violence, and impunity against indigenous peoples towards strengthening their collectives, solidarity, and actions.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Industrious Education Fund and the most unlike its peers is Cool Earth Action Usa 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 33 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% 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.
61 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 61 of the 76 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 GREEN ENERGY OHIO ↗
- Who funds LICKING LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE INC ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO COALITION TO END HOMELESSNESS ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN ENVIROMENTAL COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds FOOD GATHERERS ↗
- Who funds JEWISH SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCY ↗
- Who funds Grinnell Area Arts Council DBA Grinnell Community TheatreTurlachUr ↗
- Who funds Freedom for Immigrants ↗
- Who funds Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Assoc ↗
- Who funds NEW ISRAEL FUND ↗
- Who funds INDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK ↗
- Who funds BETA BY DESIGN ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FARMLAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC JUSTICE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds THE CARBON UNDERGROUND ↗
- Who funds COORDINATED ADVICE & REFERRAL PROGRAM FOR LEGAL SERVICES ↗
- Who funds ASHOKA ↗
- Who funds PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ↗
- Who funds COOL EARTH ACTION USA INC ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR LOCAL SELF RELIANCE ↗
- Who funds WOMENS HEALTH PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds ABOLITIONIST LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds WELCOMING AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN NEAR EAST REFUGEE AID ↗
- Who funds IF NOT NOW EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds SEEDS OF PEACE INC ↗
- Who funds LAND STEWARDSHIP PROJECT ↗
- Who funds NDN COLLECTIVE INC ↗
- Who funds FUND TEXAS CHOICE ↗
- Who funds BET TZEDEK ↗
- Who funds Elevated Access Inc ↗
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: Impactassetsinc · Tides Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Patagoniaorg · United States Energy Foundation · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · The Energy Foundation · Foundation to Promote Open Society · Clif Family Foundation · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Wallace Global Fund II · Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) 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 Bfk 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Public Justice Center Inc — 5% of income from government
- Jewish Social Service Agency — 1% 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.