· Private foundation
General Service Foundation
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 FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k8 grants · $32k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $71k
- $50k–250k45 grants · $4.4M
- $250k+1 grant · $310k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GROUNDSWELL FUND | $310,000 |
| NEIGHBORHOOD FUNDERS GROUP | $210,000 |
| ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS | $200,000 |
| NEW VENTURE FUND | $200,000 |
| ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS | $200,000 |
| NATIONAL DOMESTIC WORKERS ALLIANCE | $180,000 |
| BOREALIS PHILANTHROPY | $160,000 |
| PEOPLE'S ACTION INSTITUTE | $150,000 |
| KAIROS FELLOWSHIP | $140,000 |
| WOMENS MARCH NETWORK | $125,000 |
| SPARK REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE | $125,000 |
| SOLIDAIRE NETWORK | $125,000 |
| BOLD FUTURE NEW MEXICO | $125,000 |
| UNITED WE DREAM NETWORK | $120,000 |
| SOLIDAIRE NETWORK | $110,000 |
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, $804k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 42% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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 +20% since the first grant, against +11% for the ones you funded once.
79 repeat relationships — 37 still active in FY2024, 42 since wound down; 12 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, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.1M 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
- GFGroundswell Fund5× · 2019–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +5%
NEO Philanthropy Inc5× · 2019–2023 · $749k · revenue +58%
National Domestic Workers Alliance Inc6× · 2019–2024 · $745k · revenue +290%
Funded once
- BTBEND THE ARCone grant, 2022 · $160k
- ACAction Center on Race & the Economy Institutegraduatedone grant, 2021 · $155k · revenue +30%
- BFBOLD FUTURES NMone grant, 2022 · $125k · revenue -23%
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.
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,…
Fund for Justice is a nationally connected social impact research and advocacy organization that works to achieve fundamental, systemic reform by addressing policies and practicies that prevent individuals from reaching their full…
The Alliance for Collective Action convenes leaders of environmental and social movements to advance solutions for a thriving planet. We advance our mission through the Alliance Center building and community, as well as through Collective…
New Roots Institute is a nonprofit empowering the next generation with knowledge and training to end factory farming.
Women donors network advances a just, equitable, and sustainable world through the power of philanthropy, women's leadership, and collective and individual action.
The Equal Justice Society (EJS) is transforming the nations consciousness on racethrough law, social science, and the arts. EJS works to dismantle structural andinstitutional racism to advance robust equal protection under the Fourteenth…
South Asian Americans Leading Together is a national movement strategy and advocacy organization committed to racial justice through structural change.
Southern coalition for social justice partners with communities of color and economically disadvantaged communities across the south to defend and advance their political, social, and economic rights. through an intersectional and…
Bold Impact is a national nonprofit dedicated to supporting a democracy where all communities get to thrive.
Advance democracy, equity, and self-determination in U.S. territories through participatory advocacy, narrative and cultural change, and ecosystem building.
We activate community power to redesign social systems to be just and equitable for all through (1) developing and supporting leaders and organizations and (2) leading campaigns, coalitions, and innovative initiatives.
Fuerza Laboral is a workers' rights center whose mission is to shift the balance of power in our economy in favor of workers by educating, training, and organizing workers to become community leaders; taking direct action to recover unpaid…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy and the most unlike its peers is Instituto Lab. 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 24 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 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.9% 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.
109 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. 109 of the 147 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 ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC ↗
- Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
- Who funds PROTEUS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Groundswell Fund ↗
- Who funds Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BOREALIS PHILANTHROPY ↗
- Who funds NEO Philanthropy Inc ↗
- Who funds National Domestic Workers Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds Neighborhood Funders Group ↗
- Who funds Solidaire Network Inc ↗
- Who funds Forward Together ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE'S ACTION INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds SOGOREA TE LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds UNITED FOR A NEW ECONOMY ↗
- Who funds SUNRISE MOVEMENT EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT LAW PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Womens March Network ↗
- Who funds BVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds FRACTURED ATLAS INC ↗
- Who funds WORKERS DEFENSE PROJECT ↗
- Who funds United for Respect Education Fund ↗
- Who funds DEMOS A NETWORK FOR IDEAS AND ACTION LTD ↗
- Who funds MIJENTE SUPPORT COMMITTEE ↗
- Who funds WESTERN STATES CENTER ↗
- Who funds UNITED WE DREAM NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERNERS ON NEW GROUND INC ↗
- Who funds SPARK REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE NOW ↗
- Who funds NEW AMERICAN LEADERS INC ↗
- Who funds MS FOUNDATION FOR WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds CHINESE PROGRESSIVE ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds COLORADO IMMIGRANT RIGHTS COALITION ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR CULTURAL POWER ↗
- Who funds CENTRO DE LOS DERECHOS DEL MIGRANTE INC ↗
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: Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Ford Foundation · NEO Philanthropy Inc · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Impactassetsinc · Tides Foundation · New Venture Fund · Foundation to Promote Open Society · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · The Libra Foundation · Groundswell Fund
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 General Service Foundation 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.
- Community Catalyst Inc — 15% of income from government
- Centro De Los Derechos Del Migrante Inc — 4% of income from government
- Third Sector New England Inc — 3% 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 General Service Foundation?
Find your warmest path to General Service Foundation 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.