Skip to content
Codepink Women for Peace at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Codepink Women for Peace

To end u.s.

$1.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$1.5M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

International$1.9MPhilanthropy$600kArts & Culture$47kEducation$20kPublic Benefit$9k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $1,500,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,543,800 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $43,800 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$1,500,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$818k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ETINA$1,500,000
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 (FY22–22, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%THE PEOPLES FORUM: $8k → 17%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.
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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.9M · 4 repeat orgs$677k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +41% since the first grant, against +35% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
6

Total granted

$1.9M
$677k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+41%
+35%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalEnvironmentPhilanthropyArts & CulturePublic BenefitHuman ServicesOther
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

  • ET
    ENVIRONMENTALISM THROUGH INSPIRATION & NONVIOLENT ACTION
    3× · 2019–2025 · $1.6M · revenue -20%
  • GI
    GRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC
    2× · 2018–2024 · $259k · revenue +392%
  • IM
    Independent Media Institute
    2× · 2022–2023 · $47k · revenue +41%

Funded once

  • OPENCOLLECTIVE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $600k · revenue -100%
  • GH
    GLOBAL HEALTH PARTNERS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $30k · revenue +35%
  • YR
    Yemen Relief and Reconstruction Foundationgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue +77%
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
Coalition for Democracy and Human Rights in Iran
Civil Rights
2
Institute for Eastwest Studies Inc

Eastwest institute (ewi) works to reduce international conflict, addressing seemingly intractable problems that threaten world security and stability. (continued on schedule o)

—
3
Iran Human Rights Documentation Center Inc

The mission of the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center is to: Establish a comprehensive and objective historical record of the human rights situation in Iran, and on the basis of this record, establish responsibility for patterns of…

International
4
Institute for New Global Politics Inc

The Institute for New Global Politics is a California-based educational nonprofit corporation organized and operated exclusively for charitable purposes. It is an independent and nonpartisan thinktank dedicated to educating the general…

International
5
Global Policy Forum Inc

Research and education of United Nations activities

International
6
The Conversationalist
—
7
Indians for Collective Action

ICA's mission is to support sustainable development in India by partnering with dedicated non-government organizations (NGO's) and individuals.

Civil Rights
8
International Institute of Islamic Medicine

International Institute of Islamic Medicine (IIIM) acquires and disseminates knowledge of the rich history of Islamic medicine and fosters its contemporary application

Human Services
9
Education for Peace in Iraq Center

To act as a rights-based development organization focused on climate and the environment, good governance, and human security in Iraq through groundbreaking field work, research, policy analysis, and advocacy.

International
10
International Action Network for Gender Equity and Law Iangel

IANGEL is an international network dedicated to advancing gender equity and protecting the human and civil rights of women and girls, through peaceful, legal means. IANGEL advances its mission by connecting the lawyers and legal…

Civil Rights
11
Global Voice
—
12
Meedan Inc

To strengthen journalism, digital literacy and information accessibility for global communities.

Science & Tech
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Grassroots International Inc; the most unlike its peers is Iranian American Medical Association. 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

10 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ENVIRONMENTALISM THROUGH INSPIRATION & NONVIOLENT ACTION: $1,558,043 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTALISM THROUGH INSPIRATION & NONVIOLENT ACTIONOPENCOLLECTIVE FOUNDATION: $600,000 · PhilanthropyOPENCOLLECTIVE FOUNDATIONGRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC: $258,500 · InternationalGRASSROOTS INT…GLOBAL HEALTH PARTNERS INC: $30,000 · InternationalGLOBAL HEALTH …Yemen Relief and Reconstruction Foundation: $19,787 · InternationalYemen Relief a…+1 more: $10,065 · InternationalIndependent Media Institute: $47,000 · Arts & CultureIRANIAN AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION: $20,000 · EducationABOUT FACE VETERANS AGAINST THE WAR: $8,922 · Public BenefitPeople's Forum Inc: $8,350 · Human Services
Environment$1,558,043Philanthropy$600,000International$318,352Arts & Culture$47,000Education$20,000Public Benefit$8,922Human Services$8,350

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetENVIRONMENTALISM THROUGH INSPIRATION & NONVIOLENT ACTION: $1,558,043 over 3y, 3.7% of budgetOPENCOLLECTIVE FOUNDATION: $600,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetGRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC: $258,500 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetIndependent Media Institute: $47,000 over 2y, 3.3% of budgetGLOBAL HEALTH PARTNERS INC: $30,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetIRANIAN AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION: $20,000 over 2y, 4.4% of budgetYemen Relief and Reconstruction Foundation: $19,787 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetABDUL SATTAR EDHI INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION INC: $10,065 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetABOUT FACE VETERANS AGAINST THE WAR: $8,922 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetPeople's Forum Inc: $8,350 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

Gs Donor Advised Phil…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management IncNY11.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · 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 Codepink Women for Peace funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Codepink Women for Peace. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Codepink Women for Peace?

    Find your warmest path to Codepink Women for Peace 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.

    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 10 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 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 Codepink Women for Peace’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