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

· Public charity

Grove Action Fund

To promote social welfare and effect positive changes in policies related to women's reproductive healthcare, immigrant rights, social safety net services and civic engagement of marginalized communities.

$4.1M
Granted FY2024still arriving
44
Grants FY2024still arriving
11
States reached
$750k
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 FY2018–2024.

Public Benefit$11MCivil Rights$10MEnvironment$2.5MPhilanthropy$660kCommunity Improvement$625kEmployment$300kHuman Services$280kCrime & Legal$270kOther$0
02FY2024 · 44 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k16 grants · $458k
  • $50k–250k25 grants · $2.5M
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.2M
$50,000
Median grant
11
States reached
$15M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AMERICA VOTES$750,000
FORWARD ACTION FUND (SOMOS VOTANTES C4)$415,000
CENTER FOR CIVIC ACTION$210,000
BETTER FUTURE FOR NEW MEXICO$200,000
ONE APIA NEVADA$200,000
PROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA ACTION FUND$200,000
NEO PHILANTHROPY ACTION FUND$150,000
NEW LEFT ACCELERATOR$140,000
TIDES ADVOCACY (ADVANCE NATIVE POLITICAL LEADERSHIP ACTION FUND)$100,000
ACTIVATE 48$100,000
GROUNDSWELL ACTION FUND$100,000
COMMON CAUSE GEORGIA$100,000
PROGRESSNOW AZ$100,000
NATIVE VOTERS ALLIANCE NEVADA$100,000
BATTLE BORN PROGRESS$85,000
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 (FY19–24, $1.5M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 66% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL INC: $25k → 13%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $100k → 11%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL INC: $25k → 13%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $80k → 11%FORWARD TOGETHER ACTION: $140k → 10%FORWARD TOGETHER ACTION: $75k → 10%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $70k → 11%FORWARD TOGETHER ACTION: $75k → 10%WOMEN'S REFUGEE COMMISSION: $11k → 17%NILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND: $100k → 14%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $60k → 11%NILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND: $100k → 14%NILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND: $100k → 14%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $30k → 11%NILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND: $100k → 14%NILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND: $84k → 14%NILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND: $68k → 14%NPH ACTION FUND POLITICAL ISSUES COMMITTEE: $150k → 10%NPH ACTION FUND POLITICAL ISSUES COMMITTEE: $60k → 10%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

NH
WA
IL
WI
NY
OR
NV
OH
CA
MD
AZ
NM
NC
DC
LA
AL
GA
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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$23M · 57 repeat orgs$2.7M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +61% since the first grant, against +9% for the ones you funded once.

57 repeat relationships — 35 still active in FY2024, 22 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

57
30

Total granted

$23M
$2.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+61%
+9%

Still filing today

89%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $289k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Civil RightsCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesPublic BenefitEnvironmentInternationalOther

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

  • AV
    America Votes
    7× · 2018–2024 · $3.6M · revenue +495%
  • CF
    CENTER FOR CIVIC ACTION
    7× · 2018–2024 · $1.3M · revenue ×17 · 81% of their budget
  • TA
    TIDES ADVOCACY
    6× · 2018–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +130%

Funded once

  • AA
    ADRC ACTION
    one grant, 2022 · $525k · revenue -95%
  • CG
    CANDIDE GROUP LLC
    one grant, 2022 · $375k
  • SM
    SUNRISE MOVEMENT EDUCATION FUND
    one grant, 2021 · $350k · revenue -75%

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
Colorado People's Action

Colorado people's action (cpa) is a member-driven, racial justice organization dedicated to winning long-lasting progressive public policies in colorado. cpa builds power by mobilizing voters, electing our own people to office, holding…

—
2
Climate Equity Action Fund

The climate equity action fund (ceaf) works hand-in-hand with community-based partners in critical states across the country to secure and sustain policy wins for climate and clean energy. building on over a decade of trust with leading…

Environment
3
Powerswitch Action

Powerswitch action is a national network forging collective democracy and economies in our cities and states, together with our 21 grassroots affiliates.

Community Improvement
4
Six Action

Six action realizes a bold policy agenda that secures and sustains meaningful racial, gender, social and economic justice outcomes that center the people most impacted by systemic and structural oppression. we support values-aligned state…

Civil Rights
5
Nmvc Action Fund

NMVC Action Fund engages in lobbying activities in support of New Mexicos children and families and it participates in electoral activities.

Youth Development
6
Our Voice Nuestra Voz

Our Voice Nuestra Voice is a nation-building organization, anchoring ancestry while building Black and Brown solidarity in New Orleans. We remember our shared culture and language, reconnect to the land, and organize our community around…

Human Services
7
American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona

The american civil liberties union of arizona is the state's premier guardian of liberty working through the arizona legislature and communities statewide to defend and preserve individual rights and freedoms guaranteed to all by the…

—
8
Right to Democracy Action

Advance democracy, equity, and self-determination in u.s. territories, including by promoting civic engagement among the territorial diaspora throughout the united states.

—
9
Act for America

Advocacy concerning democratic values, national security and defense; lobbying of government officials in favor of policies that further the defense of the u.s. and its constitution; development of coalitions with other organizations to…

Civil Rights
10
Yes On National Popular Vote

Support "yes" vote on referendum dealing with national popular vote

—
11
Protect Colorados Vote

To oppose a colorado statewide ballot initiative to join the national popular vote compact

—
12
Missouri Jobs With Justice Voter Action

To develop and advocate for legislation, regulations, ballot initiatives, and government programs as a voice of the working class, to promote social justice, and to stimulate the economy; and, to conduct research, educate the public, and…

Civil Rights

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Somos Accion and the most unlike its peers is Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyFaith-Based Social ServicesYouth Mentoring ProgramsMilitary Veterans SupportEnvironmental Conservation …Women & Girls Leadership De…Volunteer Fire & Ems Servic…Policy Research and AdvocacyImmigrant Worker Support
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 8 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%17%<5yr14%39%5–10yr19%27%10–20yr16%10%20–35yr13%3%35–55yr16%3%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%13%<5yr14%23%5–10yr19%53%10–20yr16%7%20–35yr13%2%35–55yr16%2%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 17% of your grantees by number, and just 13% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 5% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
5%
5/92
the rest of the field
13%
240,395/1,819,473

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

81 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. 81 of the 98 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.

13
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
31
Early backer (in before they grew)
75/81
Grantees still filing
49/81
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

ARIZONA WINS — $2,240,000 · Civil RightsARIZONA WINSCENTER FOR CIVIC ACTION — $1,300,000 · Civil RightsCENTER FOR CIVIC ACTIONNEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc — $860,000 · Civil RightsNEO Philanthropy Action Fund IncPROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA ACTION — $580,000 · Civil RightsPROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA A…ADRC ACTION — $525,000 · Civil RightsFORWARD ACTION FUND — $515,000 · Civil RightsMI FAMILIA VOTA — $500,000 · Civil RightsPROGRESSNOW NEW MEXICO — $490,000 · Civil RightsOUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA — $410,000 · Civil RightsTHE ORGANIZING ALLIANCE — $360,000 · Civil RightsLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $355,000 · Civil Rights+16 more — $1,886,500 · Civil Rights+16 moreTIDES ADVOCACY — $1,110,000 · OtherTIDES ADVOCACYBETTER FUTURE FOR NEW MEXICO — $840,000 · OtherBETTER FUTURE FOR NEW MEXICONM NATIVE VOTE — $380,000 · OtherNM NATIVE VOTECANDIDE GROUP LLC — $375,000 · OtherCANDIDE GROUP LLCSUNRISE MOVEMENT — $350,000 · OtherCONSERVATION VOTERS NEW MEXICO — $300,000 · OtherUNITE HERE ACTION FUND — $300,000 · OtherPROTECT DEMOCRACY UNITED — $300,000 · OtherNEVADA ALLIANCE — $255,000 · OtherSIERRA CLUB — $245,000 · OtherBlack Voters Matter Fund Inc — $238,500 · Other+35 more — $2,036,000 · Other+35 moreAmerica Votes — $3,580,000 · Community ImprovementAmerica VotesBATTLE BORN PROGRESS — $410,000 · Community ImprovementBATTLE BORN PROGRESSORGANIZERS IN THE LAND OF ENCHANTMENT — $375,000 · Community ImprovementORGANIZERS IN THE LAND…SHERIFF ACCOUNTABILITY ACTION — $240,000 · Community ImprovementActivate 48 Inc — $200,000 · Community ImprovementWORKER POWER — $195,000 · Community Improvement+2 more — $175,000 · Community ImprovementNILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND — $551,500 · Human ServicesLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA — $340,000 · Human ServicesFORWARD TOGETHER ACTION — $290,000 · Human ServicesNPH Action Fund — $210,000 · Human ServicesGeorgia Campaign for Adolescent Power and Potential Inc — $50,000 · Human Services+1 more — $11,000 · Human ServicesNEW LEFT ACCELERATOR — $390,000 · Public BenefitInstituto Power — $372,000 · Public BenefitNORTH FUND — $225,000 · Public BenefitCOMMON DEFENSE CIVIC ENGAGEMENT INC — $150,000 · Public BenefitCIVIC EMPOWERMENT COALITION — $120,000 · Public BenefitBLACK LEADERSHIP ORGANIZING COLLABORATIVE — $45,000 · Public Benefit+1 more — $40,000 · Public BenefitSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND — $400,000 · EnvironmentSUNRISE MOVEMENT EDUCATION FUND — $350,000 · Environment+1 more — $25,000 · EnvironmentONE APIA NEVADA — $675,000 · International
Civil Rights$10,021,500Other$6,729,500Community Improvement$5,175,000Human Services$1,452,500Public Benefit$1,342,000Environment$775,000International$675,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetAmerica Votes — $3,580,000 over 7y, 2.0% of budgetARIZONA WINS — $2,240,000 over 6y, 22% of budgetCENTER FOR CIVIC ACTION — $1,300,000 over 7y, 81% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY — $1,110,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetNEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc — $860,000 over 7y, 1.7% of budgetONE APIA NEVADA — $675,000 over 6y, 27% of budgetPROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA ACTION — $580,000 over 4y, 9.6% of budgetNILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND — $551,500 over 6y, 10% of budgetADRC ACTION — $525,000 over 1y, 8.3% of budgetFORWARD ACTION FUND — $515,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetMI FAMILIA VOTA — $500,000 over 4y, 16% of budgetPROGRESSNOW NEW MEXICO — $490,000 over 7y, 42% of budgetBATTLE BORN PROGRESS — $410,000 over 5y, 22% of budgetOUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA — $410,000 over 5y, 9.7% of budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND — $400,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetNEW LEFT ACCELERATOR — $390,000 over 5y, 9.4% of budgetNM NATIVE VOTE — $380,000 over 6y, 97% of budgetORGANIZERS IN THE LAND OF ENCHANTMENT — $375,000 over 6y, 8.6% of budgetInstituto Power — $372,000 over 6y, 18% of budgetTHE ORGANIZING ALLIANCE — $360,000 over 4y, 77% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $355,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetSUNRISE MOVEMENT EDUCATION FUND — $350,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetSUNRISE MOVEMENT — $350,000 over 2y, 5.2% of budgetLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA — $340,000 over 5y, 3.5% of budgetCONSERVATION VOTERS NEW MEXICO — $300,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetUNITE HERE ACTION FUND — $300,000 over 2y, 5.1% of budgetPROTECT DEMOCRACY UNITED — $300,000 over 4y, 9.8% of budgetFORWARD TOGETHER ACTION — $290,000 over 3y, 18% of budgetPROGRESS ARIZONA — $280,000 over 3y, 16% of budgetNEVADA ALLIANCE — $255,000 over 7y, 20% of budgetSIERRA CLUB — $245,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetRURAL ARIZONA ACTION — $240,000 over 4y, 9.4% of budgetSHERIFF ACCOUNTABILITY ACTION — $240,000 over 5y, 5.5% of budgetBlack Voters Matter Fund Inc — $238,500 over 4y, 2.0% of budgetNORTH FUND — $225,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetUNITED WE DREAM ACTION — $210,000 over 4y, 5.7% of budgetNPH Action Fund — $210,000 over 2y, 6.5% of budgetSOMOS ACCION — $200,000 over 4y, 40% of budgetGroundswell Action Fund — $195,000 over 3y, 4.4% of budgetWORKER POWER — $195,000 over 3y, 8.1% of budgetWOMENS FOUNDATION OF FLORIDA INC — $190,000 over 4y, 14% of budgetBLACK WOMEN FOR WELLNESS ACTION PROJECT — $175,000 over 5y, 34% of budgetYIMBY ACTION — $160,000 over 4y, 7.8% of budgetCOMMON DEFENSE CIVIC ENGAGEMENT INC — $150,000 over 3y, 9.9% of budgetNATIVE VOTERS ALLIANCE NEVADA — $150,000 over 2y, 8.2% of budgetPOWER COALITION FOR ELECTORAL JUSTICE — $150,000 over 4y, 7.6% of budgetNevada Conservation League — $140,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetCIVIC EMPOWERMENT COALITION — $120,000 over 2y, 100% 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 America Votes ↗
  • Who funds ARIZONA WINS ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR CIVIC ACTION ↗
  • Who funds TIDES ADVOCACY ↗
  • Who funds NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc ↗
  • Who funds ONE APIA NEVADA ↗
  • Who funds PROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA ACTION ↗
  • Who funds NILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND ↗
  • Who funds ADRC ACTION ↗
  • Who funds FORWARD ACTION FUND ↗
  • Who funds MI FAMILIA VOTA ↗
  • Who funds PROGRESSNOW NEW MEXICO ↗
  • Who funds BATTLE BORN PROGRESS ↗
  • Who funds OUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA ↗
  • Who funds SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND ↗
  • Who funds NEW LEFT ACCELERATOR ↗
  • Who funds NM NATIVE VOTE ↗
  • Who funds ORGANIZERS IN THE LAND OF ENCHANTMENT ↗
  • Who funds Instituto Power ↗
  • Who funds THE ORGANIZING ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC ↗
  • Who funds SUNRISE MOVEMENT EDUCATION FUND ↗
  • Who funds SUNRISE MOVEMENT ↗
  • Who funds LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA ↗
  • Who funds CONSERVATION VOTERS NEW MEXICO ↗
  • Who funds UNITE HERE ACTION FUND ↗
  • Who funds PROTECT DEMOCRACY UNITED ↗
  • Who funds FORWARD TOGETHER ACTION ↗
  • Who funds PROGRESS ARIZONA ↗
  • Who funds NEVADA ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds SIERRA CLUB ↗
  • Who funds RURAL ARIZONA ACTION ↗
  • Who funds SHERIFF ACCOUNTABILITY ACTION ↗
  • Who funds Black Voters Matter Fund Inc ↗
  • Who funds NORTH FUND ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WE DREAM ACTION ↗
  • Who funds NPH Action Fund ↗
  • Who funds Activate 48 Inc ↗

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.

Sixteen Thirty FundTides AdvocacyWay to Win Action Fun…Open Society Action F…All Hands on Deck Net…Women Donors Network …America VotesNorth FundNEO Philanthropy Acti…Democracy Fund Voice …State Engagement FundTides Foundation
Sixteen Thirty FundDC91.2× affinity47 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · Tides Advocacy · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · Open Society Action Fund Inc · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Women Donors Network Action · America Votes · North Fund · NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc · Democracy Fund Voice Inc · State Engagement Fund · Tides 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 Grove Action Fund 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 · 10%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 98 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 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