Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Center for International Policy Inc

The center for international policy is a woman-led, progressive, independent nonprofit center for research, education, and advocacy working to advance a more peaceful, just, and sustainable u.s.

$246k
Granted FY2022
2
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$131k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20182022.

Environment$2.8MInternational$250kCommunity Improvement$115k
02FY2022 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$130,903
Median grant
1
States reached
$853k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MIGHTY EARTH$130,903
QUINCY INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIBLE STATECRAFT$114,897
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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY18–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 98% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%EARTH INNOVATION INSTITUTE: $50k → 10%THE RAINFOREST FOUNDATION: $30k → 20%WIN WITHOUT WAR: $248k → 14%WAXMAN STRATEGIES: $780k → 14%WAXMAN STRATEGIES: $701k → 14%WAXMAN STRATEGIES: $364k → 14%FOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION: $310k → 14%FOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION: $221k → 14%FOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION: $199k → 14%MIGHTY EARTH: $131k → 14%FOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION: $15k → 14%ARMS CONTROL ASSOCIATIONFORUM ON ARMS TRADE: $2k → 14%QUINCY INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIBLE STATECRAFT: $115k → 14%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.

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.

03Your 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
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
2
Partnership for Policy Integrity

Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.

Environment
3
The Breakthrough Institute

The Breakthrough Institute is a research center that identifies and promotes technological solutions to environmental and human development challenges.

Environment
4
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
5
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
6
Global Policy Forum Inc

Research and education of United Nations activities

International
7
Rocky Mountain Institute

Transform the global energy system to secure a clean, prosperous, zero-carbon future for all.

8
The International Institute for Strategic Studies - Us

To provide accurate, objective information and analysis on international strategic issues for legislators, diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business leaders, economists, the military, defense commentators, journalists,…

International
9
The Fund for Peace Inc

Building bridges across diverse sectors, and developing innovative technologies and tools for policy makers. a leader in the conflict assessment and early warning field, the fund for peace focuses on the problems of weak and failing…

International
10
Center for Arms Control and

A nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to enhancing international peace and security in the 21st century, thereby retaining its focus on nuclear weapons but expanding to include other present emerging security threats.

International
11
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
12
Sustainable World Inc

See schedule o part i for description of the organizations mission.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Earth Innovation Institute and the most unlike its peers is The Arms Control Associations. 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

8 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. 8 of the 9 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

WAXMAN STRATEGIES — $1,845,140 · OtherWAXMAN STRATEGIESFOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION — $745,290 · EnvironmentFOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATIONMIGHTY EARTH INC — $130,903 · EnvironmentMIGHTY EARTH INC+1 more — $30,000 · EnvironmentWin Without War Education Fund — $247,925 · International+1 more — $2,000 · InternationalQUINCY INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIBLE STATECRAFT — $114,897 · Community ImprovementEarth Innovation Institute — $50,457 · PhilanthropyTHE CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT DOCUMENTARY INC — $20,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$1,845,140Environment$906,193International$249,925Community Improvement$114,897Philanthropy$50,457Arts & Culture$20,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetFOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION — $745,290 over 4y, 2.6% of budgetWin Without War Education Fund — $247,925 over 1y, 27% of budgetMIGHTY EARTH INC — $130,903 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetQUINCY INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIBLE STATECRAFT — $114,897 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetEarth Innovation Institute — $50,457 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetRAINFOREST FOUNDATION INC — $30,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT DOCUMENTARY INC — $20,000 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

Rockefeller Brothers Fund IncNY13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Rockefeller Brothers Fund Inc · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Center for International Policy 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 6%
  • The Center for Independent Documentary Inc6% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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.

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 9 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph