· Private foundation
Foundation for a Just Society
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 $10k35 grants · $67k
- $10k–50k33 grants · $1.0M
- $50k–250k199 grants · $25M
- $250k+90 grants · $37M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FONDO DE ACCION URGENTE PARA AMERICA LATINA Y EL CARIBE | $1,100,000 |
| URGENT ACTION FUND - AFRICA | $1,100,000 |
| INITIATIVE SANKOFA D'AFRIQUE DE L'OUEST | $1,000,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000,000 |
| BOREALIS PHILANTHROPY | $1,000,000 |
| FONDO CENTROAMERICANO DE MUJERES FOUNDATION | $1,000,000 |
| CAPITAL FOR GOOD USA | $1,000,000 |
| ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS | $1,000,000 |
| AMALGAMATED CHARITABLE FOUNDATION | $850,000 |
| URGENT ACTION FUND ASIA AND PACIFIC | $750,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $750,000 |
| IPAS | $700,000 |
| WOMEN'S FUND ASIA LIMITED | $700,000 |
| INITIATIVE SANKOFA D'AFRIQUE DE L'OUEST | $600,000 |
| EQUALITY FUND | $555,000 |
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 US giving — 72% of grant dollars ($247M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 28% that went abroad ($96M) is mapped below.
Your human-services grants (FY20–24, $8.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 95% 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 — 28% of all-years giving ($96M)
42 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.
276 repeat relationships — 183 still active in FY2024, 93 since wound down; 51 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, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8.5M 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
- CFCapital for Good USA4× · 2021–2024 · $4.0M · revenue +24% · 32% of their budget
- FFFUNDERS FOR LESBIAN AND GAY ISSUES INC DBA FUNDERS FOR LGBTQ ISSUES5× · 2020–2024 · $2.9M · revenue +33% · 27% of their budget
- PGPANORAMA GLOBAL4× · 2021–2024 · $2.0M · revenue +47%
Funded once
- UAURGENT ACTION FUND-AFRICA (UAF-AFRICA)one grant, 2022 · $1.7M
- GFGIRLS FIRST FUNDone grant, 2020 · $1.0M
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2021 · $800k
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.
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.
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…
Girls for gender equity (gge) works intergenerationally, through a black feminist lens, to achieve gender and racial justice by centering the leadership of black girls and gender-expansive young people of color to reshape culture and…
The mission of the international women's forum is to advance women's leadership worldwide. iwf takes direct action to achieve our mission in three important ways. connect: our convenings provide networking and cutting-edge content…
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.
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
Common future is a network of pioneering leaders across the u.s. and canada who work deeply within their communities to create alternative approaches to business, philanthropy, and investing. we envision an economy that has transitioned…
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.
A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…
IWWG empowers women writers with workshops events and community gatherings to encourage writing speaking and publishing
Women first invests in grassroots initiatives driven by women and girls in developing economies that sustainably advance their lives.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy and the most unlike its peers is Womens March Inc. 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 25 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 10% 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.
195 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. 195 of the 515 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
- Who funds PROTEUS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE ASTRAEA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC ↗
- Who funds Capital for Good USA ↗
- Who funds BOREALIS PHILANTHROPY ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds FUNDERS FOR LESBIAN AND GAY ISSUES INC DBA FUNDERS FOR LGBTQ ISSUES ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK WOMEN'S FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds URGENT ACTION FUND FOR FEMINIST ACTIVISM ↗
- Who funds Groundswell Fund ↗
- Who funds GIRL DETERMINED ↗
- Who funds National Domestic Workers Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds PANORAMA GLOBAL ↗
- Who funds CREATING RESOURCES FOR EMPOWERMENT AND ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds Partners Asia ↗
- Who funds PROGEORGIA STATE TABLE INC ↗
- Who funds MIJENTE SUPPORT COMMITTEE ↗
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: The Ford Foundation · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Foundation to Promote Open Society · Novo Foundation · NEO Philanthropy Inc · Groundswell Fund · Tides Foundation · Proteus Fund Inc · The Overbrook Foundation · Borealis Philanthropy · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors 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 Foundation for a Just Society 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.
- Disability Rights Fund Inc — 10% of income from government
- The Center for Independent Documentary Inc — 6% of income from government
- Center for Food Action in New Jersey — 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 Foundation for a Just Society?
Find your warmest path to Foundation for a Just Society 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.