Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

Girls on the Run International Inc

To inspire girls to be joyful, healthy and confident using a fun, experience-based curriculum which creatively integrates running.

$694k
Granted FY2025still arriving
37
Grants FY2025still arriving
19
States reached
$35k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
0193% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2025.

Youth Development$4.2MRecreation & Sports$1.5MHuman Services$475kHousing & Shelter$202kHealth$50kPhilanthropy$37kEducation$34kCrime & Legal$34kOther$482k
02FY2025 · 37 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 37 grants below total $551,320 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $694,206 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $142,886 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k16 grants · $114k
  • $10k–50k21 grants · $438k
$11,465
Median grant
19
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GIRLS ON THE RUN GREATER OREGON$35,179
GIRLS ON THE RUN PUGET SOUND$32,067
GIRLS ON THE RUN SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT$28,026
GIRLS ON THE RUN WORCESTER COUNTY$27,829
GIRLS ON THE RUN HUDSON VALLEY$27,500
GIRLS ON THE RUN SHENANDOAH VALLEY$27,475
GIRLS ON THE RUN NORTH CENTRAL WEST VIRGINIA$25,000
GIRLS ON THE RUN PIEDMONT$25,000
GIRLS ON THE RUN SPOKANE COUNTY$22,500
GIRLS ON THE RUN SOUTH LOUISIANA$20,500
GIRLS ON THE RUN CENTRAL COAST$20,024
GIRLS ON THE RUN NEW JERSEY EAST$18,976
GIRLS ON THE RUN GREATER RICHMOND$18,612
GIRLS ON THE RUN WESTSOUND$18,500
GIRLS ON THE RUN LOS ANGELES COUNTY$16,764
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $443k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 66% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%GIRLS ON THE RUN UPSTATE NY: $11k → 14%GIRLS ON THE RUN DETROIT: $22k → 10%GIRLS ON THE RUN MID MICHIGAN: $31k → 16%GIRLS ON THE RUN GREAT LAKES BAY: $15k → 18%GIRLS ON THE RUN GREATER DETROIT: $30k → 21%GIRLS ON THE RUN BIRMINGHAM METRO: $14k → 16%GIRLS ON THE RUN GREATER KANSAS CITY: $5k → 5%GIRLS ON THE RUN GREATER KANSAS CITY: $7k → 15%GIRLS ON THE RUN PUGET SOUND: $32k → 9%GIRLS ON THE RUN WESTSOUND: $19k → 9%GIRLS ON THE RUN CENTRAL NEW JERSEY: $29k → 5%Girls on the Run Piedmont: $4k → 8%GIRLS ON THE RUN UPSTATE NEW YORK: $24k → 14%GIRLS ON THE RUN MID MICHIGAN: $15k → 16%GIRLS ON THE RUN SAGINAW BAY: $11k → 18%GIRLS ON THE RUN GREATER DETROIT: $21k → 21%GIRLS ON THE RUN GREATER KANSAS CITY: $26k → 15%GIRLS ON THE RUN CENTRAL NEW JERSEY: $26k → 5%GIRLS ON THE RUN UPSTATE NY: $5k → 14%GIRLS ON THE RUN MID MICHIGAN: $13k → 16%GIRLS ON THE RUN SAGINAW COUNTY: $4k → 18%GIRLS ON THE RUN GREATER DETROIT: $14k → 21%GIRLS ON THE RUN GREATER KANSAS CITY: $10k → 15%GIRLS ON THE RUN CENTRAL NEW JERSEY: $15k → 5%GIRLS ON THE RUN MID-MICHIGAN: $12k → 16%GIRLS ON THE RUN GREATER DETROIT: $11k → 21%Girls on the Run Greater Kansas City: $4k → 15%GIRLS ON THE RUN MID MICHIGAN: $9k → 16%GIRLS ON THE RUN GREATER DETROIT: $4k → 21%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

VT
NH
WA
ID
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
MO
WV
VA
MD
DE
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
DC
LA
AL
GA
TX
FL

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$6.5M · 101 repeat orgs$479k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +32% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.

101 repeat relationships — 15 still active in FY2025, 86 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

101
40

Total granted

$6.5M
$290k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+32%
0%

Still filing today

98%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $189k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Youth DevelopmentRecreation & SportsHuman ServicesEducationCrime & LegalHousing & ShelterOther

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

  • GO
    GIRLS ON THE RUN NYC INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $336k · revenue +142%
  • GO
    GIRLS ON THE RUN MINNESOTA INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $322k · revenue +66%
  • GO
    Girls on the Run of Portland Metro DBA Girls on the Run of Greater Oregon
    8× · 2017–2025 · $237k · revenue +81%

Funded once

  • GO
    GIRLS ON THE RUN EL PASO
    one grant, 2019 · $23k
  • GO
    Girls on the Run Lehigh Valley & Poconograduated
    one grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue +80%
  • GO
    GIRLS ON THE RUN OF EASTERN IOWA
    one grant, 2018 · $18k · revenue +19%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Girls on the Run of the Greater Piedmont

We inspire girls to be joyful, healthy and confident using a fun, experience-based curriculum which creatively integrates running. We envision a world where every girl knows and activates her limitless potential and is free to boldly…

Recreation & Sports
2
Girls On the Run - Maine

To inspire girls to be joyful, healthy and confident using a fun, experience-based curriculum which creatively integrates running.

Education
3
Girls on the Run Tn 6 332

We insprie girls to be joyful, healty, and confident using a fun, experience- based curriculum which creatively integrates running.

—
4
Girls on the Run of the Grand Valley

An inclusive and empowering enrichment program for young girls to learn whole-body health & foundational life skills through curriculum, utilizing Positive Youth Development and Social Emotional Learning strategies, while incorporating…

Recreation & Sports
5
Girls On the Run of Louisville Inc

We inspire girls to be joyful healthy and confident using a fun experience-based curriculum which creatively integrates running We envision a world where every girl knows and activates her limitless potential and is free to boldly pursue…

Recreation & Sports
6
Girls On the Run of Nebraska

A positive youth development program that encourages preteen girls to build character and confidence with a curriculum that incorporates running.

Human Services
7
Girls On the Run Southcentral Ak

We inspire girls to be joyful, healthy and confident using a fun, experience-based curriculum which creatively integrates running.

Youth Development
8
Girls On the Run Central Kentucky Corporation

The girls on the run researched-based curriculum is structured around understanding ourselves, valuing relationships and teamwork, and recognizing how we can shape the world at large. participants gain critical life skills that strengthen…

Education
9
Girls On the Run Southern Maryland Inc

To inspire girls to be joyful, healthy and confident using a fun, experience-based curriculum which creatively integrates running. gotr somd shall be affiliated with girls on the run international.

—
10
Girls On the Run of Miami Inc

We inspire girls to be joyful, healthy and confident using a fun, experience-based curriculum which creatively integrates running.

Youth Development
11
Girls on the Run of Southern Idaho Inc

To operate an independent council of the national Girls on the Run organization,whose purpose is the creation and operation of programs aimed at third through fifth grade girls; specifically, running games, running events, and physical…

Youth Development
12
Girls On the Run of the Treasure Coast Incorporated

Girls on the Run of the Treasure Coast delivers a physical activity-based positive youth development program to 3rd through 8th grade girls that inspires them to be joyful, healthy and confident. The program culminates with girls…

Youth Development

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Girls On the Run Greater Boston and the most unlike its peers is Cutler-Orosi Community for Youth. 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 16 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%3%<5yr14%2%5–10yr19%62%10–20yr16%25%20–35yr13%4%35–55yr16%4%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%2%<5yr14%0%5–10yr19%56%10–20yr16%37%20–35yr13%2%35–55yr16%3%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
3%5/154
the rest of the field
13%
240,391/1,819,411

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.

04the grantee network

140 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. 140 of the 146 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
48
Early backer (in before they grew)
132/140
Grantees still filing
94/140
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

GIRLS ON THE RUN NYC INC — $336,434 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS ON THE RUN NYC INCGIRLS ON THE RUN MINNESOTA INC — $321,832 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS ON THE RUN MINNESOTA INCGIRLS ON THE RUN OF CENTRAL OHIO — $238,464 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS ON THE RUN OF CENTRAL OHIOGirls on the Run of Los Angeles County — $174,765 · Youth DevelopmentGirls on the Run of Greater Summit Girls on the Run of Northeast Ohio — $173,475 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS ON THE RUN GREATER BOSTON — $140,588 · Youth Development+73 more — $2,813,032 · Youth Development+73 moreGIRLS ON THE RUN - CHICAGO INC — $395,569 · Recreation & SportsGIRLS ON THE RUN - CHICA…Girls on the Run of Portland Metro DBA Girls on the Run of Greater Oregon — $237,117 · Recreation & SportsGirls on the Run of Port…Girls on the Run Puget Sound — $99,599 · Recreation & SportsGirls on the Run Puget S…Girls on the Run Central Virginia and Blue Ridge — $96,207 · Recreation & SportsGirls on the Run Central…Girls on the Run of the Bay Area Inc — $87,624 · Recreation & SportsGirls on the Run of the …GIRLS ON THE RUN OF SILICON VALLEY INC — $81,179 · Recreation & SportsGIRLS ON THE RUN OF SILI…GIRLS ON THE RUN OF THE GREATER CHESAPEAKE — $70,612 · Recreation & SportsGIRLS ON THE RUN WEST MICHIGAN — $58,680 · Recreation & SportsGIRLS ON THE RUN OF THE DFW METROPLEX — $56,017 · Recreation & SportsGIRLS ON THE RUN OF CENTRAL MARYLAND INC — $54,890 · Recreation & Sports+11 more — $246,298 · Recreation & Sports+11 moreGIRLS ON THE RUN SOUTH LOUISIANA — $100,054 · OtherGIRLS ON THE RUN CENTRAL COAST INC — $71,761 · OtherGirls on the Run Poconos — $52,719 · OtherUPMC — $48,322 · OtherGIRLS ON THE RUN ORANGE COUNTY — $26,250 · OtherGIRLS ON THE RUN EL PASO — $22,500 · OtherGIRLS ON THE RUN OF HUNTERDON BUCKS AND WARREN COUNTIES — $20,901 · OtherGIRLS ON THE RUN CAPITAL REGION — $19,139 · OtherGIRLS ON THE RUN OF GREATER ROCHESTER INC — $20,227 · OtherGIRLS ON THE RUN MICHIANA — $30,124 · Other+21 more — $138,773 · OtherYMCA of Metropolitan Detroit — $103,200 · Human ServicesGirls on the Run Mid Michigan — $80,155 · Human ServicesWHATCOM FAMILY YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION — $73,067 · Human ServicesHARK-ALS INC — $69,547 · Human ServicesGIRLS ON THE RUN SERVING GREATER KANSAS CITY MISSOURI — $58,172 · Human ServicesGIRLS ON THE RUN UPSTATE NY INC — $40,087 · Human ServicesUNDERGROUND RAILROAD INC — $29,471 · Human Services+3 more — $21,578 · Human ServicesGIRLS ON THE RUN PHILADELPHIA — $174,025 · Housing & ShelterLUTHERAN SENIOR SERVICES EAST — $28,258 · Housing & ShelterGIRLS ON THE RUN NEW HAMPSHIRE — $50,456 · HealthGIRLS ON THE RUN HUDSON VALLEY INC — $31,562 · PhilanthropyBATTLE CREEK COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $5,500 · Philanthropy
Youth Development$4,198,590Recreation & Sports$1,483,792Other$550,770Human Services$475,277Housing & Shelter$202,283Health$50,456Philanthropy$37,062

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN - CHICAGO INC — $395,569 over 6y, 12% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN NYC INC — $336,434 over 9y, 12% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN MINNESOTA INC — $321,832 over 9y, 7.8% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN OF CENTRAL OHIO — $238,464 over 7y, 9.7% of budgetGirls on the Run of Portland Metro DBA Girls on the Run of Greater Oregon — $237,117 over 8y, 13% of budgetGirls on the Run of Los Angeles County — $174,765 over 7y, 6.1% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN PHILADELPHIA — $174,025 over 7y, 20% of budgetGirls on the Run of Greater Summit Girls on the Run of Northeast Ohio — $173,475 over 7y, 10% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN GREATER BOSTON — $140,588 over 7y, 5.3% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN MID STATE PA — $134,889 over 6y, 7.4% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN NJ EAST INC — $120,388 over 7y, 5.2% of budgetGirls on the Run Georgia Inc — $113,470 over 6y, 3.3% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN OF LANCASTER — $104,896 over 6y, 5.8% of budgetYMCA of Metropolitan Detroit — $103,200 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN RIVERSIDE — $100,315 over 4y, 23% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN SOUTH LOUISIANA — $100,054 over 7y, 12% of budgetGirls on the Run Puget Sound — $99,599 over 5y, 6.1% of budgetGirls on the Run of San Diego — $96,522 over 7y, 4.8% of budgetGirls on the Run Central Virginia and Blue Ridge — $96,207 over 3y, 31% of budgetGirls on the Run of the Bay Area Inc — $87,624 over 5y, 3.1% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN OF THE ROCKIES — $84,361 over 8y, 2.4% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN OF BUFFALO INC — $84,337 over 5y, 8.1% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN OF SILICON VALLEY INC — $81,179 over 7y, 5.2% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN MEMPHIS — $81,000 over 3y, 44% of budgetGirls on the Run Mid Michigan — $80,155 over 5y, 17% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN OF S HAMPTON ROADS — $79,677 over 5y, 3.1% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN - DC — $76,908 over 6y, 4.5% of budgetWHATCOM FAMILY YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION — $73,067 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN OF GREATER CINCINN — $71,496 over 5y, 6.2% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN GREATER HOUSTON — $70,677 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN OF THE GREATER CHESAPEAKE — $70,612 over 6y, 5.1% of budgetHARK-ALS INC — $69,547 over 3y, 3.6% of budgetGirls on the Run of Northwest Indiana — $63,416 over 6y, 3.8% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN WEST MICHIGAN — $58,680 over 5y, 5.4% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN SERVING GREATER KANSAS CITY MISSOURI — $58,172 over 7y, 2.3% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN OF THE DFW METROPLEX — $56,017 over 5y, 6.2% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN IDAHO INC DBA Girls on the Run Treasure Valley — $55,903 over 6y, 6.2% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN OF CENTRAL MARYLAND INC — $54,890 over 6y, 4.1% of budgetGirls on the Run of Southeastern Suburban PA — $54,889 over 7y, 4.5% of budgetGirls on the Run Poconos — $52,719 over 4y, 19% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN WORCESTER COUNTY INC — $50,781 over 5y, 7.9% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN NEW HAMPSHIRE — $50,456 over 6y, 4.4% of budgetGirls on the Run of NOVA — $50,162 over 5y, 1.3% of budgetGirls on the Run - Western MA Council — $48,486 over 6y, 3.0% of budgetGirls on the Run of the Triangle Inc — $47,728 over 6y, 2.5% of budgetGirls on the Run Greater Connecticut — $46,948 over 4y, 12% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN OF DAYTON — $46,622 over 4y, 8.6% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN OF SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN INC — $45,733 over 5y, 2.6% of budget
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.

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.

Dick's Sporting Goods…Rite Aid Healthy Futu…Womens Sports Foundat…Good Sports IncFlourish Arbonne Foun…Baranay Family Founda…Enterprise Holdings F…Laureus Sport for Goo…American Eagle Outfit…Womens Funding Allian…Ch Robinson Worldwide…Catalina Marketing Ch…
Dick's Sporting Goods FoundationPA77.9× affinity67 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Dick's Sporting Goods Foundation · Rite Aid Healthy Futures · Womens Sports Foundation · Good Sports Inc · Flourish Arbonne Foundation · Baranay Family Foundation Inc · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · Laureus Sport for Good Foundation USA · American Eagle Outfitters Foundation · Womens Funding Alliance · Ch Robinson Worldwide Foundation · Catalina Marketing Charitable 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 Girls on the Run International 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 170%3%10%23%40%your share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 16%
  • Boys and Girls Clubs of Bend Inc — 16% of income from government
  • Girls On the Run Greater Boston — 4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
17get no government money at all
23report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 146 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines