Skip to content
Global Poverty Project Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Global Poverty Project Inc

Our mission is to build a movement of global citizens whose actions will help achieve our vision of a world without extreme poverty.

$4.9M
Granted FY2022
1
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$500k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
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 2022.

Public Benefit$2.4MInternational$621kEnvironment$210kFood & Nutrition$100kCivil Rights$100kPhilanthropy$100kYouth Development$50kHuman Services$10k
02FY2022 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $500,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $4,883,238 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $4,383,238 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.
$500,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$20M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HeadCount$500,000
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 (FY21–21, $120k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Border Angels: $10k → 11%Swipe Out Hunger: $100k → 14%HEALTHY COMMUNITY RESOURCES & ADVOCACY: $10k → 23%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

VT
MI
NY
PA
CA
UT
LA
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $2.9M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 6 regions, $2.6M to organizations and $310k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$1.8M · 62% · 2 grants · 1 person

Stated purpose: OPERATING SUPPORT · WAISLITZ WINNERS

East Asia and the Pacific$398k · 14% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: OPERATING SUPPORT · GC PRIZE WINNER

Sub-Saharan Africa$266k · 9% · 4 grants · 2 people

Stated purpose: OPERATING SUPPORT · GC PRIZE WINNER · WAISLITZ WINNERS

South America$250k · 9% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CISCO YOUTH LEADERSHIP AWARD

North America (Canada and Mexico)$107k · 4% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: OPERATING SUPPORT

South Asia$100k · 3% · 1 person

Stated purpose: WAISLITZ WINNERS

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.
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
Global Forest Generation

Global Forest Generation restores and protects forest ecosystems in partnership with grassroots leaders and local communities across vast landscapes which play a critical role in preserving water, protecting biodiversity, storing carbon,…

Environment
2
Reef Check Foundation

Leading Citizen scientists to promote stewardship of sustainable reef communities worldwide.

Environment
3
Rainforest Foundation Inc

The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.

Environment
4
Natura Bolivia Foundation

The Natura Bolivia Foundation is dedicated to implementing, and evaluating the impact of conservation and development programs, with a focus on watershed conservation, protected areas, and incentive based conservation in Bolivia. We work…

International
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
Reforest the Tropics Incorporated

Development of programs to offset personal and corporate carbon emissions through reforestation in the tropics.

Environment
7
Natura International Inc

Natura International conserves rainforests and other key natural ecosystems and the endangered species they contain through creation of protected areas in collaboration with local governments and communities in Latin America. In this way…

Public Benefit
8
Amazon Watch Inc

To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with Indigenous communities in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability, and the preservation of the Amazon Basin's…

Environment
9
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
10
Marine Megafauna Foundation

Save threatened marine life using pioneering research, education, and sustainable conservation solutions

International
11
Rainforest Action Network

Rainforest Action Network (RAN) works toward a world where the rights and dignity of all communities are respected and where healthy forests, a stable climate and wild biodiversity are protected and celebrated.

Environment
12
American Forests

Protection and expansion of threatened urban and wildland forest ecosystems. See Part III

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Nola Tree Project. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

16 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. 16 of the 17 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
8/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HEAD COUNT INC: $2,350,000 · Civil RightsHEAD COUNT INCUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $322,774 · InternationalUNITED STATES …UNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INC: $148,273 · InternationalUNITED NATIONS…THE RAINFOREST FUND INC: $150,000 · EnvironmentTHE RAINFO…GREEN AMENDMENTS FOR THE GENERATIONS: $100,000 · EnvironmentGREEN AMEN…THE CORAL RESTORATION FOUNDATION INC: $50,000 · EnvironmentTHE CORAL …Bahamas National Trust Fund Inc: $25,000 · EnvironmentBahamas Na…+1 more: $10,000 · EnvironmentSalt Lake Education Foundation: $100,000 · PhilanthropyCCF COMMUNITY INITIATIVES FUND: $50,000 · PhilanthropySWIPE OUT HUNGER: $100,000 · Human ServicesBORDER ANGELS: $10,000 · Human ServicesHEALTHY COMMUNITY RESOURCES AND ADVOCACY INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesDREAMERS ROADMAP: $80,000 · EducationYES WE CAN WORLD FOUNDATION: $10,000 · EducationEDJA FOUNDATION: $50,000 · OtherPERRY INSTITUTE FOR MARINE SCIENCE: $25,000 · Other
Civil Rights$2,350,000International$471,047Environment$335,000Philanthropy$150,000Human Services$120,000Education$90,000Other$75,000

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 budgetHEAD COUNT INC: $2,350,000 over 3y, 24% of budgetUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $322,774 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE RAINFOREST FUND INC: $150,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetUNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INC: $148,273 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSWIPE OUT HUNGER: $100,000 over 1y, 7.5% of budgetGREEN AMENDMENTS FOR THE GENERATIONS: $100,000 over 1y, 21% of budgetSalt Lake Education Foundation: $100,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetCCF COMMUNITY INITIATIVES FUND: $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE CORAL RESTORATION FOUNDATION INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetBahamas National Trust Fund Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetPERRY INSTITUTE FOR MARINE SCIENCE: $25,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetBORDER ANGELS: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetYES WE CAN WORLD FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetHEALTHY COMMUNITY RESOURCES AND ADVOCACY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 5.7% of budgetNOLA Tree Project: $10,000 over 1y, 2.5% 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.

Tides FoundationNational Philanthropi…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Tides FoundationCA13.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tides Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · 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 Global Poverty Project Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Global Poverty Project Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 16%
  • The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc: 16% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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 17 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $2.9M of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2022, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Global Poverty Project’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