· Private foundation
Favaro Family Foundation Inc
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
- Under $10k5 grants · $16k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $115k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GIVE WELL | $50,000 |
| PRINCETON UNIVERSITY | $45,000 |
| STANFORD UNIVERSITY | $20,000 |
| NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST | $15,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT | $15,000 |
| THE POSSIBILITY PROJECT | $10,000 |
| NEW YORK-PRESBYTERIAN LAWRENCE HOSPITAL CENTER | $10,000 |
| AMERICAS FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| IBIS REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH | $5,000 |
| NYPIRG | $2,600 |
| MIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S INSTITUTE | $2,000 |
| NWBCCC | $1,000 |
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 human-services grants (FY19–24, $45k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 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
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.
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 +48% since the first grant, against +29% for the ones you funded once.
13 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 2 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, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $46k 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
- TCTHE CLEAR FUND4× · 2018–2024 · $129k · revenue +648%
- IRINTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT INC3× · 2019–2024 · $36k · revenue +82%
- IRIBIS REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH INC4× · 2019–2024 · $17k · revenue +16%
Funded once
- NTNUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE INCone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -1%
- TCTIDES CENTER PROJECT NAME ALLIANCE FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICEone grant, 2020 · $5k
- AFALLIANCE FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICEgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +56%
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.
The center for justice innovation is a non-profit organization that works to create a fair, effective, and humane justice system and build strong, thriving communities.
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
Poptech's mission is to accelerate the positive impact of world-changing people, projects and ideas. founded in 1996 by bob metcalfe (inventor, ethernet) and john sculley (apple, pepsi), poptech originally provided a forum to critically…
We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world. we take a multidisciplinary, intergenerational, life-cycle approach that contributes to (see schedule o)four global…
Building bridges across diverse sectors, and developing innovative technologies and tools for policy makers. a leader in the conflict assessment and early warning field, the fund for peace focuses on the problems of weak and failing…
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…
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…
To lead and coordinate the global initiative to address and prevent criminalization, violence, and impunity against indigenous peoples towards strengthening their collectives, solidarity, and actions.
Namati, inc. (namati) is dedicated to putting the law in people's hands. we strive to build a just world, in which every one of us can take part in the decisions and demand accountability from the institutions that affect our lives.…
Global ties u.s. (global ties) powers individuals, communities, and nations to build trust and advance peace and prosperity through international exchange.
Just capital's mission is to build a more just economy that works for all americans by helping companies improve how they serve all their stakeholders - workers, customers, communities, the environment, and shareholders - as defined by the…
Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is We the Protesters Inc and the most unlike its peers is Cool Earth Action Usa Inc. 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 25 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% 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.
23 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 23 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 THE CLEAR FUND ↗
- Who funds THE POSSIBILITY PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds The Trustees of Princeton University ↗
- Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST ↗
- Who funds AMERICAS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds IBIS REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH INC ↗
- Who funds THE BOMA PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds NUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE INC ↗
- Who funds Oakland Community Land Trust ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds GRAHAM WINDHAM ↗
- Who funds HOT BREAD KITCHEN LTD ↗
- Who funds MIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds THE BRONX FREEDOM FUND INC ↗
- Who funds COOL EARTH ACTION USA INC ↗
- Who funds LAWRENCE COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH ↗
- Who funds WORTH RISES INC ↗
- Who funds WE THE PROTESTERS INC ↗
- Who funds Bay Area Community Law Foundation ↗
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: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · New Venture Fund · The Ford Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The San Francisco Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Jewish Communal Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Network for Good · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Favaro Family Foundation Inc 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.
- The Trustees of Princeton University — 11% of income from government
- Ibis Reproductive Health Inc — 9% 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.