Skip to content
Giving What We Can USA Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Giving What We Can USA Inc

Giving what we can's mission is to make giving effectively and significantly a cultural norm.

$5.9M
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
8
States reached
$2.1M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 13 grants below total $5,448,547, the rows itemized in this filing. The $5,943,692 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $495,145 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 · $142k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $513k
  • $250k+5 grants · $4.8M
$104,741
Median grant
8
States reached
$22M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC$2,099,997
EFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUNDATION USA INC$1,188,234
LONGVIEW PHILANTHROPY USA INC$843,128
THE CLEAR FUND DBA GIVEWELL$374,405
THE HUMANE LEAGUE$287,216
GOOD ENERGY COLLECTIVE INCORPORATED$249,999
HORIZON INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE$104,741
GIVEDIRECTLY INC$83,714
THE AGAINST MALARIA FOUNDATION$74,776
MALARIA CONSORTIUM US INC$49,870
ANIMAL ADVOCACY AFRICA$36,712
ANIMAL CHARITY EVALUATORS$30,459
HELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL$25,296
02The need
02

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, $84k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%GIVEDIRECTLY INC: $84k → 17%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

NY
PA
CA
MO
VA
MD
DE
DC
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.
03Its 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
Fund for the Global Fund

To encourage individuals, corporations, foundations and donor governments to support the global fund, an international foundation focused on ending three of the world's most deadly infectious diseases.

Human Services
2
Animal Outlook Inc

Animal outlook is a national animal protection organization working to end the abuse of farmed animals using a variety of strategies, including investigations, legal advocacy, corporate and food system reform, and vegan outreach.

Animals
3
Mercy for Animals Inc

Mercy for animals' mission is to construct a compassionate food system that is not just kind to animals but essential for the future of our planet and all who share it. our vision of a world where animals are respected, protected, and free…

Animals
4
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A global nonprofit biomedical research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
5
Animal Agriculture Alliance

The animal agriculture alliance is a nonprofit organization that helps bridge the communication gap between farm and fork. we connect food industry stakeholders, engage food chain influencers and promote consumer choice by helping key…

Food & Nutrition
6
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
7
Actionaid Usa

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…

Social Science
8
Faunalytics

Empower animal advocates with research, insights, and strategies that maximize their effectiveness to end animal suffering.

—
9
E3G Third Generation Environmentalism

E3g is a leading international not-for-profit think tank specialising in climate diplomacy harnessing expertise in the politics and economics of climate change.

Environment
10
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
11
Animal Alliance Asia

Our mission is to build and mobilize a community of local animal justice and vegan advocates across Asia to create waves of impactful actions for a better world for farmed animals.

Animals
12
Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide

Educational & charitable. to provide legal and scientific information to public interest attorneys and scientists in numerous countries.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Effective Ventures Foundation Usa Inc; the most unlike its peers is Helen Keller International. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

13 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
5/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $2,099,997 · Food & NutritionTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INCLONGVIEW PHILANTHROPY USA INC: $843,128 · PhilanthropyLONGVIEW PHILANTHROPY USA I…THE CLEAR FUND: $374,405 · PhilanthropyTHE CLEAR FUNDHORIZON INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE: $104,741 · PhilanthropyHORIZON INSTITUTE FOR PUBLI…EFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUNDATION USA INC: $1,188,234 · EducationEFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUND…THE HUMANE LEAGUE: $287,216 · AnimalsANIMAL ADVOCACY AFRICA: $36,712 · AnimalsANIMAL CHARITY EVALUATORS: $30,459 · AnimalsGOOD ENERGY COLLECTIVE INC: $249,999 · Social ScienceThe Against Malaria Foundation: $74,776 · HealthMALARIA CONSORTIUM US INC: $49,870 · HealthGIVEDIRECTLY INC: $83,714 · Human ServicesHELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL: $25,296 · International
Food & Nutrition$2,099,997Philanthropy$1,322,274Education$1,188,234Animals$354,387Social Science$249,999Health$124,646Human Services$83,714International$25,296

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 budgetTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $2,099,997 over 1y, 7.5% of budgetEFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUNDATION USA INC: $1,188,234 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetLONGVIEW PHILANTHROPY USA INC: $843,128 over 1y, 8.4% of budgetTHE CLEAR FUND: $374,405 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE HUMANE LEAGUE: $287,216 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetGOOD ENERGY COLLECTIVE INC: $249,999 over 1y, 20% of budgetHORIZON INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE: $104,741 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetGIVEDIRECTLY INC: $83,714 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Against Malaria Foundation: $74,776 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMALARIA CONSORTIUM US INC: $49,870 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetANIMAL ADVOCACY AFRICA: $36,712 over 1y, 11% of budgetANIMAL CHARITY EVALUATORS: $30,459 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetHELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL: $25,296 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.

Good Ventures Foundat…Silicon Valley Commun…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
Good Ventures FoundationCA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Good Ventures Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Giving What We Can USA Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Giving What We Can USA Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get 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 · 0–90%
    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.

    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 13 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 Giving What We Can USA’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