· Public charity
Dt Institute
The organization focuses on strengthening communities and leaders, working with local organizations, and developing new approaches through action oriented research in the areas of stabilization, transition, and peacebuilding, and media, rights and democracy.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 19 grants below total $1,707,127 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $4,572,947 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $2,865,820 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k6 grants · $131k
- $50k–250k11 grants · $1.0M
- $250k+2 grants · $561k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WEST POINT ASSOCIATION OF GRADUATES | $303,333 |
| NET FREEDOM PIONEERS | $257,310 |
| SA GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LLC | $237,556 |
| INTERNET MASTERING AND COMPANY INC | $104,903 |
| HUMANITARIAN ORGANIZATIONS FOR PEACE | $100,000 |
| THE CARTER SCHOOL | $100,000 |
| THE CARTER CENTER | $100,000 |
| THE TOR PROJECT INC | $75,000 |
| PROJECT EXPEDITE JUSTICE | $71,061 |
| BRAVE NEW SOFTWARE PROJECT INC | $70,000 |
| ACUTIS VENTURES LLC | $55,000 |
| FRACTUS LLC WEPN | $52,000 |
| LAU HEALTH FOUNDATION INC | $50,000 |
| OPERATOR FOUNDATION | $37,500 |
| INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMICS AND PEACE | $32,500 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 89% of your 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
Grants abroad, by region — $2.6M on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 2 regions, $2.3M to organizations and $288k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: PROGRAM SERVICE
Stated purpose: GRANT ADMINISTRATION · SUBGRANT
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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
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.
15 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 10 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, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $811k 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
ASSOCIATION OF THE GRADUATES OF THE UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY3× · 2020–2024 · $703k · revenue +72%- ACATLANTIC COUNCIL OF THE UNITED STATES INC5× · 2020–2024 · $625k · revenue +84%
- UOUNIVERSITY OF DENVER4× · 2020–2023 · $485k · revenue +22%
Funded once
- IRINTERNATIONAL RESEARCH & EXCHANGES BOARD INCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $255k · revenue +87%
CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIESgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $141k · revenue +27%- CUCITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORKone grant, 2021 · $106k
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.
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,…
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
At the internet society foundation, we focus on funding initiatives that strengthen the internet in function and reach so that it can effectively serve all people. our work advances the vision of the internet society (isoc): the internet…
Ibp works with civil society, governments, international institutions and the private sector to bring about a world in which empowered citizens participate in open, inclusive public budgeting processes to shape policies and practices that…
The open technology fund aims to advance internet freedom globally by supporting the research, development, implementation, and maintenance of technologies that provide secure and uncensored access to the internet.
See schedule onorc at the university of chicago conducts research and data science on critical societal issues to guide decision-making and the development of programs and public policy. our experts identify relationships and trends, and…
The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…
Protecting and advancing freedom of expression and privacy in information and communications technology (ict) sector.
Iri advances freedom and democracy worldwide by developing political parties, civic institutions, open elections, democratic governance and the rule of law.
The institute for energy research (ier) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. ier maintains that freely functioning…
American foreign service association (afsa) is both the principal advocate for the long-term institutional wellbeing of the professional career foreign service and responsible for safeguarding the interest of afsa members. (continued on…
A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Thesentryorg Inc and the most unlike its peers is Sudan Transparency and Policy Tracker Corporation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 19 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) — 4% 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.
24 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. 24 of the 32 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 ASSOCIATION OF THE GRADUATES OF THE UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds ATLANTIC COUNCIL OF THE UNITED STATES INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF DENVER ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ORPHANS D/B/A NPH-USA ↗
- Who funds NETFREEDOM PIONEERS ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH & EXCHANGES BOARD INC ↗
- Who funds SIAMAK POURZAND FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PROJECT EXPEDITE JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ELECTORAL SYSTEMS ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES ↗
- Who funds THE CARTER CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds OPERATOR FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds University of Chicago ↗
- Who funds THE TOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds Brave New Software Project Inc ↗
- Who funds THESENTRYORG INC ↗
- Who funds LAU HEALTH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Spirit of America Worldwide ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL WATER CHALLENGE ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMICS AND PEACE ↗
- Who funds SEATTLE INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SUDAN TRANSPARENCY AND POLICY TRACKER CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR DEMOCRACY ↗
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: National Endowment for Democracy · The Ford Foundation · Internews Network · Humanity United · New Venture Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Dt Institute 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.
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 Dt Institute?
Find your warmest path to Dt Institute 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.