Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Public charity

Global Ties US

Global ties u.s.

$10.0M
Granted FY2024still arriving
74
Grants FY2024still arriving
40
States reached
$393k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.

International$62MCommunity Improvement$1.4MSocial Science$223kEducation$216kYouth Development$52kArts & Culture$12kRecreation & Sports$6kPublic Benefit$6kOther$0
02FY2024 · 74 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 74 grants below total $9,580,588 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $9,971,311 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $390,723 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k12 grants · $421k
  • $50k–250k53 grants · $6.9M
  • $250k+7 grants · $2.2M
$117,510
Median grant
40
States reached
$5.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WORLDDENVER$392,787
GLOBAL TIES SAN FRANCISCO$369,159
GLOBAL NEW ORLEANS (NEW ORLEANS CITIZEN DIPLOMACY COUNCIL)$341,900
WORLDCHICAGO$326,949
CLEVELAND COUNCIL ON WORLD AFFAIRS$293,973
GLOBAL TIES KC$268,354
CITIZEN DIPLOMACY INTERNATIONAL OF PHILADELPHIA$250,073
UTAH GLOBAL DIPLOMACY$246,939
GEORGIA COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL VISITORS$246,836
THE INTERNATIONAL CITIZEN DIPLOMACY OF LOS ANGELES$227,777
SAN DIEGO DIPLOMACY COUNCIL$225,932
WORLD ORLANDO$206,951
WORLDOREGON$206,451
WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL - SEATTLE$206,335
GLOBALAUSTIN$195,297
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 (FY17–24, $982k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, 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.

area typical 11%THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BUFFALO: $93k → 13%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WISCONSIN: $173k → 17%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BUFFALO: $86k → 13%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WISCONSIN: $150k → 17%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BUFFALO: $82k → 13%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WISCONSIN: $82k → 17%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BUFFALO: $37k → 13%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WISCONSIN: $57k → 17%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BUFFALO: $30k → 13%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WISCONSIN: $46k → 17%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BUFFALO: $25k → 13%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WISCONSIN: $43k → 17%INTERNATIONAL CENTER OF SYRACUSE: $16k → 13%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WISCONSIN: $25k → 17%INTERNATIONAL CENTER OF SYRACUSE: $15k → 13%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WISCONSIN: $21k → 17%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WISCONSIN: $2k → 17%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

ME
VT
NH
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
RI
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
VA
MD
AZ
NM
AR
NC
SC
HI
OK
LA
MS
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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$64M · 81 repeat orgs$14k to everyone else

81 repeat relationships — 73 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

81
3

Total granted

$64M
$14k

Still filing today

77%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementEducationHuman ServicesOther

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

  • NC
    Northern California World Trade Center
    8× · 2017–2024 · $3.0M · revenue +21% · 70% of their budget
  • SD
    SAN DIEGO DIPLOMACY COUNCIL
    8× · 2017–2024 · $2.1M · revenue +73% · 63% of their budget
  • WB
    WORLD BOSTON INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $2.0M · revenue +43% · 61% of their budget

Funded once

  • WS
    Wright State University
    one grant, 2017 · $7k
  • MA
    MINOT AREA COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL VISITORS
    one grant, 2019 · $6k
  • SC
    SPRINGFIELD COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL VISITORS
    one grant, 2020 · $820

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
International Relations Council

The International Relations Council strengthens Kansas Citys global perspective by maintaining an active dialogue around world events global issues and their impact on our community. As a nonpartisan educational nonprofit organization the…

International
2
Center for Internationalundersstanding

CIU is an international exchange organization that promotes cultural understanding.

International
3
Wisconsin World Affairs Council Inc
—
4
Center for International Virtual Schooling

IVECA is a US-based non-profit organization affiliated with the UN, promoting intercultural understanding through virtual classroom exchanges worldwide. Its mission is to foster global citizenship and peace through its flagship program,…

Education
5
The International Center

The International Center is a District of Columbia 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization founded in 1977, has as its principal purpose the promotion of greater international understanding and the lessening of international frictions and…

International
6
Global Ties Us

Global ties u.s. (global ties) powers individuals, communities, and nations to build trust and advance peace and prosperity through international exchange.

International
7
Council of International Programs Usa

Promotes international understanding through professional development and cross-cultural exchange. cipusa is an international exchange organization based in cleveland, ohio with a network of affiliate offices nationwide and an alumni…

International
8
Chennault Council for International
International
9
Business Council for International Understanding Inc

The Business Council for International Understanding, Inc. (BCIU) was organized to promote dialogue and action between the business and government communities for the purpose of expanding international commerce.

International
10
Friends of the International Mathematical Union
Education
11
Institute of Current World Affairs Inc
—
12
Nebraska Diplomats Inc

The nebraska diplomats,inc. includes members and state leaders who use their rapport with business executives worldwide to promote investment and employment in nebraska.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is World Affairs Council of Arizona Inc and the most unlike its peers is World Affairs Council of South Texas. 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 45 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%0%<5yr14%3%5–10yr19%14%10–20yr16%17%20–35yr13%28%35–55yr16%38%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%0%<5yr14%1%5–10yr19%13%10–20yr16%16%20–35yr13%31%35–55yr16%39%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
2%2/83
the rest of the field
13%
240,394/1,819,482

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

65 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. 65 of the 84 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.

52
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
25
Early backer (in before they grew)
62/65
Grantees still filing
48/65
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL — $1,890,701 · InternationalWORLD AFFAIRS COUNCILNEW ORLEANS CITIZEN DIPLOMACY COUNCIL — $1,749,098 · InternationalNEW ORLEANS CITIZEN DIPLOMACY COUNCILGLOBAL SANTA FE — $1,502,313 · InternationalGLOBAL MINNESOTA — $1,344,850 · InternationalThe Albuquerque Council for International Visitors — $1,334,174 · InternationalInternational Visitors Center of Chicago — $1,324,833 · InternationalWORLD PARTNERSHIPS INC — $1,299,655 · InternationalCLEVELAND COUNCIL ON WORLD AFFAIRS — $1,218,664 · InternationalWORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL OF DALLAS/FORT WORTH — $1,217,806 · InternationalWorld Affairs Council of Oregon dba WorldOregon — $1,195,207 · InternationalInternational House of Metrolina Inc — $1,188,296 · InternationalMIAMI COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL VISITORS INC — $1,161,218 · InternationalInternational Visitors Utah Council — $1,110,360 · InternationalWorld Affairs Council of New Hampshire — $1,093,141 · InternationalGLOBAL TIES KC INC — $1,083,262 · International+21 more — $12,197,993 · International+21 moreWORLD TRADE CENTER INSTITUTE INC — $1,876,797 · OtherWORLD TRADE CENTER INSTITUT…GEORGIA COUNCIL FOR INTERTNATIONAL — $1,386,915 · OtherGEORGIA COUNCIL FOR INTERTN…REGENTS UNIV OF CALIFORNIA — $1,333,933 · OtherREGENTS UNIV OF CALIFORNIAINTERNATIONAL VISITORS COUNCIL OF PHILADELPHIA — $1,331,529 · OtherINTERNATIONAL VISITORS COUN…INTERNATIONAL VISITORS COUNCIL OF METROPOLITAN DETROIT INC — $1,201,328 · OtherINTERNATIONAL VISITORS COUN…NORTHERN NEVADA INTERNATIONAL CENTER — $1,174,710 · OtherNORTHERN NEVADA INTERNATION…VERMONT COUNCIL ON WORLD AFFAIRS INC — $910,484 · OtherVERMONT COUNCIL ON WORLD AF…EL PASO COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL — $676,699 · OtherGLOBAL TIES AKRON — $601,077 · OtherWorld Affairs Council - Cincinnati & Northern Kentucky — $598,782 · Other+23 more — $4,712,715 · Other+23 moreSAN DIEGO DIPLOMACY COUNCIL — $2,137,565 · Community ImprovementSAN DIEGO DIP…WORLD BOSTON INC — $2,019,598 · Community ImprovementWORLD BOSTON …International Citizen Diplomacy of Los Angeles — $1,432,130 · Community ImprovementInternational…GlobalPittsburgh — $1,016,105 · Community ImprovementGlobalPittsbu…WORLDORLANDO INC — $1,009,103 · Community ImprovementWORLDORLANDO …Northern California World Trade Center — $2,977,011 · Arts & CultureWorld Affairs Council of Kentucky S — $997,443 · Arts & CultureINTERNATIONAL FOCUS INC — $581,969 · Arts & Culture+2 more — $218,964 · Arts & CultureDENVER WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL DBA WORLDDE — $1,842,258 · EducationGlobal Ties Alabama — $739,985 · EducationLincoln Council for International Visitors — $351,203 · EducationINTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WISCONSIN INC — $598,778 · Human ServicesTHE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BUFFALO — $383,278 · Human Services
International$31,911,571Other$15,804,969Community Improvement$7,614,501Arts & Culture$4,775,387Education$2,933,446Human Services$982,056

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetNorthern California World Trade Center — $2,977,011 over 8y, 70% of budgetSAN DIEGO DIPLOMACY COUNCIL — $2,137,565 over 8y, 63% of budgetWORLD BOSTON INC — $2,019,598 over 8y, 61% of budgetWORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL — $1,890,701 over 8y, 33% of budgetWORLD TRADE CENTER INSTITUTE INC — $1,876,797 over 8y, 23% of budgetDENVER WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL DBA WORLDDE — $1,842,258 over 8y, 38% of budgetNEW ORLEANS CITIZEN DIPLOMACY COUNCIL — $1,749,098 over 8y, 88% of budgetGLOBAL SANTA FE — $1,502,313 over 8y, 76% of budgetInternational Citizen Diplomacy of Los Angeles — $1,432,130 over 6y, 63% of budgetGEORGIA COUNCIL FOR INTERTNATIONAL — $1,386,915 over 8y, 76% of budgetGLOBAL MINNESOTA — $1,344,850 over 8y, 19% of budgetThe Albuquerque Council for International Visitors — $1,334,174 over 8y, 90% of budgetINTERNATIONAL VISITORS COUNCIL OF PHILADELPHIA — $1,331,529 over 8y, 51% of budgetInternational Visitors Center of Chicago — $1,324,833 over 6y, 19% of budgetWORLD PARTNERSHIPS INC — $1,299,655 over 8y, 78% of budgetCLEVELAND COUNCIL ON WORLD AFFAIRS — $1,218,664 over 8y, 18% of budgetWORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL OF DALLAS/FORT WORTH — $1,217,806 over 8y, 16% of budgetINTERNATIONAL VISITORS COUNCIL OF METROPOLITAN DETROIT INC — $1,201,328 over 8y, 41% of budgetWorld Affairs Council of Oregon dba WorldOregon — $1,195,207 over 6y, 33% of budgetInternational House of Metrolina Inc — $1,188,296 over 8y, 18% of budgetNORTHERN NEVADA INTERNATIONAL CENTER — $1,174,710 over 8y, 17% of budgetMIAMI COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL VISITORS INC — $1,161,218 over 8y, 75% of budgetInternational Visitors Utah Council — $1,110,360 over 6y, 39% of budgetWorld Affairs Council of New Hampshire — $1,093,141 over 8y, 88% of budgetGLOBAL TIES KC INC — $1,083,262 over 8y, 51% of budgetIOWA COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL UNDERSTANDING — $1,031,037 over 8y, 66% of budgetGlobalPittsburgh — $1,016,105 over 8y, 63% of budgetWORLDORLANDO INC — $1,009,103 over 8y, 100% of budgetWorld Affairs Council of Kentucky S — $997,443 over 8y, 65% of budgetGULF COAST CITIZEN DIPLOMACY COUNCIL INC — $985,357 over 8y, 82% of budgetGLOBALTEXAS — $983,766 over 8y, 90% of budgetCOLLEAGUES INTERNATIONAL — $966,109 over 8y, 77% of budgetVERMONT COUNCIL ON WORLD AFFAIRS INC — $910,484 over 8y, 64% of budgetSAN ANTONIO COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL VISITORS — $757,534 over 8y, 72% of budgetWORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL OF ST LOUIS — $742,814 over 8y, 64% of budgetGlobal Ties Alabama — $739,985 over 8y, 60% of budgetTULSA GLOBAL ALLIANCE — $719,641 over 8y, 75% of budgetWORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL OF ARIZONA INC — $718,184 over 8y, 62% of budgetEL PASO COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL — $676,699 over 8y, 85% of budgetGLOBALJAX INC — $623,669 over 8y, 72% of budgetGLOBAL TIES AKRON — $601,077 over 8y, 91% of budgetWorld Affairs Council - Cincinnati & Northern Kentucky — $598,782 over 6y, 37% of budgetINTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WISCONSIN INC — $598,778 over 8y, 11% of budgetCOLORADO SPRINGS WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL — $588,935 over 8y, 85% of budgetINTERNATIONAL FOCUS INC — $581,969 over 6y, 47% of budgetInternational Visitors Council Inc — $554,799 over 8y, 69% of budgetTHE INTERNATIONAL CENTER INC — $525,287 over 8y, 8.9% of budgetWorld Affairs Council of Maine — $517,297 over 8y, 95% 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.

  • Who funds Northern California World Trade Center ↗
  • Who funds SAN DIEGO DIPLOMACY COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds WORLD BOSTON INC ↗
  • Who funds WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds WORLD TRADE CENTER INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds DENVER WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL DBA WORLDDE ↗
  • Who funds NEW ORLEANS CITIZEN DIPLOMACY COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds GLOBAL SANTA FE ↗
  • Who funds International Citizen Diplomacy of Los Angeles ↗
  • Who funds GEORGIA COUNCIL FOR INTERTNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds GLOBAL MINNESOTA ↗
  • Who funds The Albuquerque Council for International Visitors ↗
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL VISITORS COUNCIL OF PHILADELPHIA ↗
  • Who funds International Visitors Center of Chicago ↗
  • Who funds WORLD PARTNERSHIPS INC ↗
  • Who funds CLEVELAND COUNCIL ON WORLD AFFAIRS ↗
  • Who funds WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL OF DALLAS/FORT WORTH ↗
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL VISITORS COUNCIL OF METROPOLITAN DETROIT INC ↗
  • Who funds World Affairs Council of Oregon dba WorldOregon ↗
  • Who funds International House of Metrolina Inc ↗
  • Who funds NORTHERN NEVADA INTERNATIONAL CENTER ↗
  • Who funds MIAMI COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL VISITORS INC ↗
  • Who funds International Visitors Utah Council ↗
  • Who funds World Affairs Council of New Hampshire ↗
  • Who funds GLOBAL TIES KC INC ↗
  • Who funds IOWA COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL UNDERSTANDING ↗
  • Who funds GlobalPittsburgh ↗
  • Who funds WORLDORLANDO INC ↗
  • Who funds World Affairs Council of Kentucky S ↗
  • Who funds GULF COAST CITIZEN DIPLOMACY COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds GLOBALTEXAS ↗
  • Who funds COLLEAGUES INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds VERMONT COUNCIL ON WORLD AFFAIRS INC ↗
  • Who funds SAN ANTONIO COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL VISITORS ↗
  • Who funds WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL OF ST LOUIS ↗
  • Who funds Global Ties Alabama ↗
  • Who funds TULSA GLOBAL ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL OF ARIZONA INC ↗
  • Who funds EL PASO COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL ↗

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.

World Learning IncMeridian Internationa…Georgetown UniversityInternational Visitor…Longview Foundation f…The Aspen Institute I…Vanguard Charitable E…Morgan Stanley Global…The Bank of America C…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…
World Learning IncVT66.8× affinity30 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: World Learning Inc · Meridian International Center · Georgetown University · International Visitors Center of Chicago · Longview Foundation for Education in World Affairs & Intl Understanding Inc · The Aspen Institute Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving 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 Ties US 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 · 30%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 9%
  • World Partnerships Inc — 38% of income from government
  • World Trade Center Institute Inc — 9% of income from government
  • World Affairs Council of Oregon dba WorldOregon — 0% of income from government
  • Vermont Council On World Affairs Inc — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
26report 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

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 84 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 2024, released 2024. 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