Skip to content

· Private foundation

David D Dodge Foundation

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.

$47k
Granted FY2025still arriving
22
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

International$174kCrime & Legal$90kCivil Rights$80kHuman Services$31kEducation$7k
02FY2025 · 22 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k21 grants · $37k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$1,500
Median grant
7
States reached
$27k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC$10,000
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC$5,000
UNIVERSITY OF RICHMOND$5,000
EXECUTION INTERVENTION PROJECT$2,700
DEATH PENALTY ACTION$2,500
FREEDOM OF THE PRESS FOUNDATION$2,500
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC$2,500
EXECUTION INTERVENTION PROJECT$2,500
EXECUTION INTERVENTION PROJECT$2,000
EXECUTION INTERVENTION PROJECT$2,000
UNIVERSITY OF RICHMOND$1,500
PROJECT HOPE TO ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY$1,000
FLORIDIANS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO THE DEATH PENALTY I$1,000
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC$1,000
DEATH PENALTY ACTION$1,000
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 (FY20–25, $31k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 10% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%FREEDOM OF THE PRESS FOUNDATION: $13k → 10%FREEDOM OF THE PRESS FOUNDATION: $3k → 20%FREEDOM OF THE PRESS FOUNDATION: $8k → 10%FREEDOM OF THE PRESS FOUNDATION: $500 → 20%FREEDOM OF THE PRESS FOUNDATION: $5k → 10%FREEDOM OF THE PRESS FOUNDATION: $3k → 10%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.

Which US states its grants reach

NY
MA
PA
CA
KY
VA
SC
DC
AL
FL
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 9% of David D Dodge Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

David D Dodge Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 25% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$353k · 10 repeat orgs$27k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
2

Total granted

$353k
$10k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+15%
+108%

Still filing today

70%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $17k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Civil RightsEducationInternationalCrime & LegalHuman 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

  • SP
    SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $78k · revenue +28%
  • RR
    RAZIAS RAY OF HOPE FOUNDATION
    6× · 2019–2025 · $38k · revenue +15%
  • FO
    FREEDOM OF THE PRESS FOUNDATION
    4× · 2020–2025 · $31k · revenue +10%

Funded once

  • EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVEgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +108%
  • DP
    DEATH PENALTY FOCUS
    one grant, 2024 · $350 · revenue 0%
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
Death Penalty Information Center
Education
2
Committee to Protect Journalists Inc

The committee to protect journalists promotes press freedom worldwide and defends the right of journalists to report the news safely and without fear of reprisal. cpj ensures the free flow of news and commentary by taking action wherever…

Civil Rights
3
Felony Murder Elimination Project

Felony Murder Elimination Project is a grassroots organization of families and community members impacted by incarceration. Our goal is to eliminate the felony murder rule from California law and bring an end to extreme sentences,…

Civil Rights
4
Center for Death Penalty Litigation

To provide direct representation to those on death row in north carolina as well as to provide consulting, research and training services to attorneys appointed to represent persons facing the death penalty in north carolina.

Crime & Legal
5
Florida Public Defender Association Inc

The mission of florida public defender association, inc. is to secure an equitable justice system and ensure high quality legal representation for people facing loss of liberty.

—
6
International Bridges to Justice

In recognition of the fundamental principles of the universal declaration of human rights, international bridges to justice (ibj) is dedicated to protecting the basic legal rights of ordinary citizens in developing countries. specifically,…

Crime & Legal
7
The Promise of Justice Initiative

The promise of justice initiative works to create positive change for people in the criminal legal system at the intersection of impact litigation, direct services and community engagement.

Crime & Legal
8
Southern Center for Human Rights

The Southern Center for Human Rights is working for equality, dignity, and justice for people impacted by the criminal legal system in the Deep South. SCHR fights for a world free from mass incarceration, the death penalty, the…

Civil Rights
9
Death Penalty Alternatives for Arizona Inc

Educate about death penalty issues

Arts & Culture
10
Ministry Against the Death Penalty

To educate people about the death penalty. education takes place in various modes: lectures; disseminating sr. helen's books, dead man walking and the death of innocents and having an active social media presence maintained through…

Human Services
11
Reprieve (Us)

Reprieve us helps people who are suffering extreme human rights abuses at the hands of powerful governments. reprieve us consists of lawyers and investigators assisting those facing detention without trial, execution and extra-judicial…

Civil Rights
12
The International Institute On Race Equality and Human Rights

The international institute on race, equality and human rights contributes to the promotion and defense of human rights, through training, technical assistance, advocacy, and strategic litigation conducted at the regional and international…

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Southern Poverty Law Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

12 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. 12 of the 15 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

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

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/12
Grantees still filing
7/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $126,915 · InternationalHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INCSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $78,000 · Crime & LegalSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CE…NATIONAL COALITION TO ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY: $28,000 · OtherNATIONAL COALIT…EXECUTION INTERVENTION PROJECT: $9,200 · OtherEXECUTION INTER…PROJECT SHELUKA: $8,500 · OtherPROJECT SHELUKAPROJECT HOPE TO ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY: $7,600 · OtherPROJECT HOPE TO…DEATH PENALTY ACTION: $27,750 · Civil RightsDEATH PENALTY…EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $10,000 · Civil RightsEQUAL JUSTICE…SOUTH CAROLINIANS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO THE DEATH PENALTY: $5,750 · Civil RightsSOUTH CAROLIN…FOUNDATION FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND EXPRESSION INC: $2,000 · Civil Rights+2 more: $1,350 · Civil RightsRAZIAS RAY OF HOPE FOUNDATION: $38,470 · EducationRAZIAS RAY OF…UNIVERSITY OF RICHMOND: $6,500 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF…FREEDOM OF THE PRESS FOUNDATION: $30,500 · Human ServicesFREEDOM O…
International$126,915Crime & Legal$78,000Other$53,300Civil Rights$46,850Education$44,970Human Services$30,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $126,915 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $78,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetRAZIAS RAY OF HOPE FOUNDATION: $38,470 over 6y, 1.1% of budgetFREEDOM OF THE PRESS FOUNDATION: $30,500 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetNATIONAL COALITION TO ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY: $28,000 over 2y, 16% of budgetDEATH PENALTY ACTION: $27,750 over 4y, 2.3% of budgetEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF RICHMOND: $6,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTH CAROLINIANS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO THE DEATH PENALTY: $5,750 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND EXPRESSION INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetDEATH PENALTY FOCUS: $350 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Network for GoodDC7.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Network for Good · 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 David D Dodge Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from David D Dodge Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%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.

    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 15 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-PF 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 David D Dodge’s filings →

    More from the funding graph