How much did Center on Budget and Policy Priorities grant in FY2024?

Public Benefit$25MHuman Services$9.5MSocial Science$8.4MCivil Rights$6.7MCommunity Improvement$4.5MEducation$3.7MEmployment$2.5MArts & Culture$2.3MPhilanthropy$1.9MOther$12M

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

corporationexempt politicalpolitical advocacyadvocacy awarenessawareness fairnessfairness statesstates taxation

2019

religiousacademicbostondistinctiveintellectualbehavioralpersons

2020

covid federalfederal responsesafety netpensionsfellowshipjuvenile justiceeducation revenue

2021

immgrationfellowssafety netrevenues cohortequity inclusionadvocacy revenueproactive revenues

2022

revenue cohortfederal eitceitc ctcproactive revenuefellowshipleadership transitionctc eitc

2023

fellowdedicated innovativeinnovative effectiveeffective interestinterest buildbuild equitablesustainable future

2024

tribalstates stepstep climateexistential threatsequitable partnershipspowerissues affect

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 137 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k3 grants · $16k
$10k–50k54 grants · $1.7M
$50k–250k71 grants · $6.0M
$250k+9 grants · $2.4M

$50,000

Median grant

States reached

$172M

Total assets

Largest grants

Policy Matters Ohio$300,000
Oregon Center for Public Policy$300,000
Florida Policy Institute$250,000
Policy Matters Ohio$250,000
Invest Louisiana (Formally Louisiana Budget Project)$250,000
West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy$250,000
Common Good Iowa$250,000
Oklahoma Policy Institute$250,000
Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families$250,000
Immigration Research Initiative co NEO Philanthropy$210,000
Georgia Budget and Policy Institute$180,000
Policy Matters Ohio$155,000
OpenSky Policy Institute$150,000
Michigan League for Public Policy$150,000
DC Fiscal Policy Institute$150,000

02The need

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 (FY17–24, $7.5M) land where the poverty rate runs at 13% — the area typically sits at 11%. 52% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$75M · 77 repeat orgs$2.0M to everyone else

77 repeat relationships — 50 still active in FY2024, 27 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$75M

$1.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+60%

+88%

Still filing today

95%

94%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $362k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Public BenefitHuman ServicesCivil RightsCrime & LegalFood & NutritionCommunity ImprovementOther

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

PM
Policy Matters Ohio
8× · 2017–2024 · $4.1M · revenue +16% · 53% of their budget
TC
The Commonwealth Institute for Fiscal Analysis
8× · 2017–2024 · $3.1M · revenue +98% · 30% of their budget
GB
Georgia Budget and Policy Institute
8× · 2017–2024 · $3.0M · revenue +58%

Funded once

CF
Center for American Progress
one grant, 2021 · $250k · revenue -28%
FF
Floridians for Tax Fairness
one grant, 2018 · $150k
OA
Ohio Association of Foodbanksgraduated
one grant, 2023 · $120k · revenue +172%

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.

Dc Policy Center

The d.c. policy center is a non-partisan, independent think tank focused on advancing policies for a vibrant and growing economy in the district of columbia. the d.c. policy center provides objective, targeted, and high-quality data…

Public Benefit

Economic Opportunity Institute

EOI works to make Washington state a national model of economic opportunity with an economy that truly works for everyone.

Community Improvement

Competitive Enterprise Institute

Public policy research/education dedicated to principles of free enterprise & limited government.

—

National Policing Institute

To creating excellence in policing through the development, translation, and application of research.

—

Justice Policy Institute

The Justice Policy Institute is dedicated to reducing the use of incarceration and involvement in the justice system by promoting fair and effective policies.

Crime & Legal

The Campaign Legal Center Inc

The nonpartisan campaign legal center advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every american's rights to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic…

Crime & Legal

Institute for Public Accuracy

The Institute for Public Accuracy reaches millions of Americans by arranging radio, TV, print and multimedia interviews for progressive policy analysts, highlighting key issues beneath the surface of the news.

Arts & Culture

Center for Effective Public Policy Inc

Improve systems of justice by sharing expertise, promoting research & facilitating change

—

Colorado Center On Law and Policy

Colorado center on law and policy is an antipoverty organization advancing the rights of every coloradan.

Crime & Legal

National Employment Law Project

Provide research and policy analysis on employment issues affecting low-wage, unemployed, and immigrant workers.

—

Environmental and Energy Study Institute

Educate policymakers about equitable science-based solutions for climate, energy, & the environment

—

National Constitution Center

The National Constitution Center is a nonpartisan nonprofit organization devoted to teaching about the Constitution.

Arts & Culture

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Economic Progress Institute and the most unlike its peers is Tides Center. 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.

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 30 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) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.9% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.9%1/114

the rest of the field

11%

206,163/1,819,451

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.

05the grantee network

111 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

108/111

Grantees still filing

90/111

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Public Benefit$25,060,454Other$19,064,000Human Services$9,469,910Social Science$8,438,150Civil Rights$6,703,500Community Improvement$4,467,500Education$3,673,000

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.

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.

Annie E Casey Foundation IncMD88.1× affinity51 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Annie E Casey Foundation Inc · Economic Policy Institute · Hopewell Fund · MAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger · New Venture Fund · Community Catalyst Inc · The Ford Foundation · Center for Law and Social Policy · Economic Security Project Inc · Food Research & Action Center · Alliance for Early Success Fka · WK Kellogg 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 organisation Center on Budget and Policy Priorities 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

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

9get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: Common Good Iowa.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

high risk

3 years of Form 990 filings, no recent filing.

Legal standing

medium risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 421378567 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on Common Good Iowa, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
FlagSustained operations— No recent filing on record.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 58% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Center on Budget and Policy Priorities?

Find your warmest path to Center on Budget and Policy Priorities through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

111 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Center on Budget and Policy Priorities?

More from the funding graph

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

111 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Center on Budget and Policy Priorities?

More from the funding graph