· Private foundation
Channel Foundation
Its FY2024 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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k4 grants · $94k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WOMEN WIN FOUNDATION INC | $50,000 |
| FEMINIST FUND | $30,000 |
| WOMEN'S EARTH AND CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK | $25,000 |
| FOS FEMINISTA | $25,000 |
| WOMEN'S REGIONAL NETWORK | $13,500 |
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 — 77% of grant dollars ($8.7M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 23% that went abroad ($2.5M) is mapped below.
Your human-services grants (FY17–23, $388k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those 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 — 23% of all-years giving ($2.5M)
14 countries, 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.
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 +37% since the first grant, against +14% for the ones you funded once.
49 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 45 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k 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
- GFGLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN INC7× · 2017–2023 · $487k · revenue +74%
- UAURGENT ACTION FUND FOR FEMINIST ACTIVISM7× · 2017–2023 · $400k · revenue +311%
THE PRAXIS PROJECT INC7× · 2017–2023 · $325k · revenue +285%
Funded once
- HCHOMESTEAD COMMUNITY LAND TRUSTone grant, 2023 · $1.5M · revenue -47%
- IIINTRN'L INDIG WOMNS FORUMFIMIone grant, 2023 · $50k
MADRE INCone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +14%
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.
Women in Migration Network (WIMN), an international non-governmental organization, identifies and promotes human rights-based and feminist global migration policies. We lift up and support the experiences, voices and agency of all women in…
To achieve legal and systematic change that addresses violence and discrimination against women and girls around the world.
Founded in 1995 wfpg works to expand the foreign policy dialogue across policital divides and generations and to support women at every stake of their careers. as champions of womens leadership we are proud of our role in expanding the…
Our mission as a global alliance is to provide strategies, research, and resources that support the critical agency and influence of women's foundations and gender justice funders in the movement for equality, justice, and power for all.
Women donors network advances a just, equitable, and sustainable world through the power of philanthropy, women's leadership, and collective and individual action.
International Rivers protects rivers and defends the rights of communities that depend on them.
Women deliver is a global feminist advocacy organization with a clear mission: to ensure that every self-identifying girl and woman has control over her body and life. see organization's full mission statement in schedule o.
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…
Ending impunity for conflict related sexual violence
Fueling a worldwide network of women human rights defenders (whrds) to strengthen laws, policies and practices to end sexual and gender-based violence (sgbv).
Engage more individuals in the civic process, educate them about the impact of public policies on their lives and our economy, and build support for policies that empower individuals.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Global Fund for Women Inc and the most unlike its peers is Womens Regional Network. 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 23 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) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% 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.
42 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. 42 of the 77 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 HOMESTEAD COMMUNITY LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds URGENT ACTION FUND FOR FEMINIST ACTIVISM ↗
- Who funds THE PRAXIS PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN ENABLED INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds Women's Link Worldwide ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S INTERNATIONAL LEAGUE FOR PEACE & FREEDOM UNO INC ↗
- Who funds FRONT LINE USA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MOBILITY INTERNATIONAL USA ↗
- Who funds CULTURAL SURVIVAL INC ↗
- Who funds Womens Regional Network ↗
- Who funds Global Press Institute ↗
- Who funds FUND FOR GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds World Pulse Voices ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE JUSTICE AND DEMOCRACY IN HAITI INC ↗
- Who funds JUST ASSOCIATES INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN CROSS DMZ Attn CATHI CHOI ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL NETWORK OF WOMEN PEACEBUILDERS INC ↗
- Who funds Minas List Inc ↗
- Who funds DISABILITY RIGHTS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Peace Development Fund ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SOCIETY ACTION NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN OF COLOR ADVANCING PEACE AND SECURITY WCAPS ↗
- Who funds OUTRIGHT INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds CREATING HOPE INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds IPAS ↗
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: Foundation to Promote Open Society · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · Tides Foundation · Foundation for a Just Society · The Ford Foundation · Rockefeller Brothers Fund Inc · Novo Foundation · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Global Fund for Women Inc · American Jewish World Service Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation 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 Channel Foundation 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.
- Mobility International Usa — 33% of income from government
- Disability Rights Fund Inc — 10% of income from government
- Rutgers University Foundation — 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Channel Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Channel Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.