· Public charity
Global Philanthropy Partnership
GLOBAL PHILANTHROPY PARTNERSHIP ("gpp") promotes strategic global philanthropy, awareness of global development issues, and sustainability initiatives.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 27 grants below total $1,496,131 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,530,019 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $33,888 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
- $10k–50k13 grants · $329k
- $50k–250k14 grants · $1.2M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC | $170,000 |
| PITTSBURGHERS FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION | $145,500 |
| ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION ALLIANCE | $111,800 |
| TRANSPORTATION RIDERS UNITED INC | $101,800 |
| ECOLOGY CENTER INC | $96,800 |
| ST PAUL TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION (DBA MOVE MINNESOTA) | $91,800 |
| NEXTGEN CLIMATE AMERICA | $90,000 |
| BIKE CLEVELAND | $51,800 |
| ALLIANCE FOR METROPOLITAN STABILITY | $51,800 |
| METROPOLITAN PLANNING COUNCIL | $51,800 |
| MOBILI SE | $51,800 |
| METROPOLITAN ORGANIZING STRATEGY ENABLING STRENGTH (MOSES) | $51,800 |
| 1000 FRIENDS OF WISCONSIN LAND USE INSTITUTE | $50,000 |
| CENTER FOR NEIGHBORHOOD TECHNOLOGY | $50,000 |
| BALTIMORE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $45,500 |
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 (FY24–24, $58k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% 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
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.
30 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2025, 17 since wound down; 13 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 54% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $663k 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
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION ALLIANCE3× · 2022–2025 · $267k · revenue +18%- SISUSTAINABILITY INSTITUTE2× · 2018–2019 · $225k · revenue +162% · 37% of their budget
- SPST PAUL TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION2× · 2020–2025 · $129k · revenue +5%
Funded once
- OGOPERATION GREEN TEAM FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $300k · revenue +54%
- FOFRIENDS OF REFUGEES INCone grant, 2020 · $150k · revenue +17%
- SESOUTHFACE ENERGY INSTITUTE INCone grant, 2020 · $150k · revenue +21%
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.
To enable the commercialization of energy technologies that positively contribute to economic competitiveness, energy security, and the environment.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
The NW Energy Coalition is an alliance of over 100 environmental, civic, and human service organizations, utilities, and businesses in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia, plus many individual members. The NW Energy…
Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
Cgc operates as a nonprofit financial institution that invests directly and through partners to transform financial markets by using public and private investing to accelerate the deployment of projects that strengthen the grid, reduce…
Green Cities Accord is a nonprofit organization dedicated to fostering climate resilient communities through investments in tree canopy infrastructure to improve environmental health, climate resilience, and equity in communities. We focus…
Climate group advances climate action by mobilizing business and government leadership to drive systemic decarbonization across energy, transport, and industry, while engaging the public through large-scale convenings and global platforms.…
The mission of San Francisco Bicycle Coalition is to transform San Francisco's streets and neighborhoods into more livable and safe places by promoting the bicycle for everyday transportation.
Informing and educating the public and decision makers about environmental issues.
To develop and promote a carbon dividends framework - based on carbon fees whose revenues are rebated to citizens through dividends - as the most cost-effective, equitable, and politically viable climate solution.
Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Livable Streets Transportation Alliance of Boston Inc and the most unlike its peers is Barry University 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 28 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
91 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 91 of the 128 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 GREENSPACES INC ↗
- Who funds ACTION COMMUNICATION AND EDUCATION REFORM ↗
- Who funds THE MAYOR'S FUND TO ADVANCE NEW YORK CITY ↗
- Who funds OPERATION GREEN TEAM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds SUSTAINABILITY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Pittsburghers for Public Transit ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds NEXTGEN CLIMATE AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF REFUGEES INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHFACE ENERGY INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds ATHENS LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds BARRY UNIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds The Urban Conservancy ↗
- Who funds ECOLOGY CENTER ↗
- Who funds ST PAUL TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION ↗
- Who funds BALTIMORE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds METROPOLITAN PLANNING COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR METROPOLITAN STABILITY ↗
- Who funds MOBILISE INC ↗
- Who funds TRANSPORTATION RIDERS UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds HEADWATERS ECONOMICS INC ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY PARTNERS ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE TO SAVE ENERGY ↗
- Who funds RIDERS ALLIANCE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds LINK HOUSTON ↗
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: United States Energy Foundation · Transitcenter Inc · The McKnight Foundation · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · AARP · The Energy Foundation · American Public Transportation Association · The Bullitt Foundation · Freedom Together Foundation · The Kresge Foundation · Policylink · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation 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 Global Philanthropy Partnership 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.
- New Buildings Institute — 100% of income from government
- Willamette Partnership — 76% of income from government
- Forth Mobility Fund — 7% of income from government
- Third Sector New England Inc — 3% of income from government
- Barry University Inc — 1% of income from government
- Ceres Inc — 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.