Skip to content
Future of Life Institute at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Future of Life Institute

To support the future of life foundation by steering transformative technology towards benefiting life and away from extreme large-scale risks.

$7.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
12
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$2.5M
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 2024.

Science & Tech$87MPhilanthropy$13MArts & Culture$8.3MEnvironment$1.3MInternational$546kCrime & Legal$25kHuman Services$15kEducation$5kOther$0
02FY2024 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 12 grants below total $6,285,957, the rows itemized in this filing. The $7,457,618 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,171,661 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.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $65k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $516k
  • $250k+5 grants · $5.7M
$247,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$6.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SILICON VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$2,470,096
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR SAFE AND ETHICAL ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE INC$1,500,000
FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS$750,000
CAF AMERICA$619,861
BERKELEY EXISTENTIAL RISK INITIATIVE$365,000
FORESIGHT INSTITUTE$247,000
WISE ANCESTORS$169,000
LONGVIEW PHILANTROPHY USA INC$100,000
FUTURE COALITION$25,000
METAGOV$15,000
LEGAL PRIORITIES INC$15,000
EFFCT$10,000
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 (FY24–24, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%LEGAL PRIORITIES INC: $15k → 16%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

NH
MA
NV
NJ
CT
CA
CO
VA
DE
DC

Grants abroad, by region: $1.0M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 5 regions, $977k to organizations and $70k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$665k · 64% · 5 grants

Stated purpose: RFP AWARD - RESEARCH ON THE IMPACT OF AI ON POVERTY, HEALTH, ENERGY · ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSIONS ON THE HUMANITARIAN IMPACT OF AUTONOMOUS WEAPONS

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$332k · 32% · 7 grants · 4 people

Stated purpose: RFP AWARD - RESEARCH ON THE IMPACT OF AI ON POVERTY, HEALTH, ENERGY · RFP AWARD - RESEARCH INTO GLOBAL GOVERNANCE INSTITUTION DESIGN · RESEARCH INTO THE CONSEQUENCES OF NUCLEAR WAR

South Asia$25k · 2% · 1 grant · 2 people

Stated purpose: RFP AWARD - RESEARCH ON THE IMPACT OF AI ON POVERTY, HEALTH, ENERGY · RESEARCH REPORT ON GPAI CODE OF PRACTICE · SUPERINTELLIGENCE IMAGINED AWARD

South America$15k · 1% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: RFP AWARD - RESEARCH ON THE IMPACT OF AI ON POVERTY, HEALTH, ENERGY

North America (Canada and Mexico)$10k · 1% · 1 person

Stated purpose: SUPERINTELLIGENCE IMAGINED AWARD

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. 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.
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 11% of Future of Life Institute’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Future of Life Institutelessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
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.

70%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$66M · 4 repeat orgs$29M to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
10

Total granted

$66M
$26M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
+58%

Still filing today

100%
70%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 5% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.0M went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
Science & TechInternationalPhilanthropyEducationAnimalsArts & CultureOther
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

  • LF
    LIGHTCONE FOUNDATION
    2× · 2022–2023 · $57M · revenue -94% · 31% of their budget
  • IT
    IMPROVE THE NEWS FOUNDATION
    3× · 2021–2023 · $8.3M · revenue +28% · 100% of their budget
  • BS
    BIOCOMPLEXITY SURVIVAL ALLIANCE
    2× · 2022–2024 · $1.3M · revenue -28% · 100% of their budget

Funded once

  • FO
    FUTURE OF LIFE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $25M · 100% of their budget
  • NI
    NON-VIOLENCE INTERNATIONALgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $279k · revenue +104%
  • GV
    GOOD VENTURES FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $162k · revenue +314%
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
Safe Artificial Intelligence Forum Institute

To drive global coordination that minimizes extreme AI risks and ensures the benefits of AI are shared by all. SAIF fosters responsible governance to reduce catastrophic risks through shared understanding and collaboration among key global…

—
2
Breakthrough Energy Foundation

Working with our world-class network of innovators, business and industry leaders, and policy experts, we accelerate the innovation of climate technologies at every stage - from discovery to development to deployment.

Public Benefit
3
Future Tech Insights Inc

The organization provides public education on artificial intelligence.

Public Benefit
4
Center for Ai Safety Inc

to reduce societal-scale risks associated with artificial intelligence AI by advancing safety research, building the field of AI safety researchers, and promoting safety standards.

Science & Tech
5
Climate Foundation

To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.

Science & Tech
6
OpenAI Foundation fka OpenAI Inc

OpenAIs mission is to ensure that artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity.

Science & Tech
7
Center for Asia-Pacific Resilience and Innovation Usa Foundation

Capri usa is a nongovernmental, nonpartisan, international organization founded in 2024 to enhance global resilience and promote innovative policy by drawing on the experience of the asia-pacific region through interdisciplinary public…

Human Services
8
Artificial Intelligence Forecasting Inc

None

Science & Tech
9
Technology Policy Institute
International
10
The Breakthrough Institute

The Breakthrough Institute is a research center that identifies and promotes technological solutions to environmental and human development challenges.

Environment
11
World Future Society

The world future society works to improve decision-making about the future by empowering futurists, fostering networks and advancing knowledge and action on future critical issues.

—
12
Convergence Analysis

Convergence Analysis mission is to improve the long-term prospects of human civilization to survive and thrive. Its specific objectives and purposes shall be: (1) To analyze existing academic research and conduct interdisciplinary basic…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Federation of American Scientists; the most unlike its peers is Good Ventures Foundation. 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

21 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. 21 of the 25 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
12/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LIGHTCONE FOUNDATION: $56,518,058 · Science & TechLIGHTCONE FOUNDATIONFUTURE OF LIFE FOUNDATION: $25,025,000 · Science & TechFUTURE OF LIFE FOUNDATION+3 more: $1,762,000 · Science & TechSilicon Valley Community Foundation: $14,660,096 · PhilanthropySilicon Valley C…CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $912,125 · PhilanthropyCHARITIES AID FO…+2 more: $261,865 · PhilanthropyIMPROVE THE NEWS FOUNDATION: $8,300,000 · Arts & CultureBIOCOMPLEXITY SURVIVAL ALLIANCE: $1,282,685 · AnimalsFEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS: $750,000 · InternationalTHE FUTURE SOCIETY INC: $180,000 · InternationalThe Pax Christi Fund for Peace: $111,747 · InternationalNON-VIOLENCE INTERNATIONAL: $279,372 · OtherSCIENTISTS AGAINST INHUMANE WEAPONS INC: $48,938 · OtherYALE LAW SCHOOL: $25,000 · OtherMARCH ON: $25,000 · OtherInstitute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc: $37,500 · Other+5 more: $36,000 · OtherBERKELEY EXISTENTIAL RISK INITIATIVE: $365,000 · Public Safety & Disaster
Science & Tech$83,305,058Philanthropy$15,834,086Arts & Culture$8,300,000Animals$1,282,685International$1,041,747Other$451,810Public Safety & Disaster$365,000

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 budgetLIGHTCONE FOUNDATION: $56,518,058 over 2y, 31% of budgetFUTURE OF LIFE FOUNDATION: $25,025,000 over 1y, 100% of budgetSilicon Valley Community Foundation: $14,660,096 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetIMPROVE THE NEWS FOUNDATION: $8,300,000 over 3y, 100% of budgetBIOCOMPLEXITY SURVIVAL ALLIANCE: $1,282,685 over 2y, 100% of budgetCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $912,125 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS: $750,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetBERKELEY EXISTENTIAL RISK INITIATIVE: $365,000 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetThe Foresight Institute: $247,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetTHE FUTURE SOCIETY INC: $180,000 over 3y, 16% of budgetGOOD VENTURES FOUNDATION: $161,865 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Pax Christi Fund for Peace: $111,747 over 1y, 24% of budgetLONGVIEW PHILANTHROPY USA INC: $100,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetInstitute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc: $37,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMARCH ON: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetLEGAL PRIORITIES INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCENTER FOR APPLIED RATIONALITY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Silicon Valley Commun…Founders Pledge IncGood Ventures Foundat…Effective Ventures Fo…Gordon E and Betty I …Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA16.6× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Founders Pledge Inc · Good Ventures Foundation · Effective Ventures Foundation USA Inc · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Future of Life Institute funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Future of Life Institute. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
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 Future of Life Institute?

Find your warmest path to Future of Life 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.

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 25 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Future of Life Institute’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