Skip to content
Harding Rock Fund at a glance

· Public charity

Harding Rock Fund

To support the tides foundation.

$39k
Granted FY2023
1
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$39k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of Harding Rock Fund’s FY2023 grant dollars went to Tides Foundation, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2023 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Organizations named directly on the return

3
’20
4
’22
0
’23

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2023.

Public Benefit$360kPhilanthropy$199kCivil Rights$175k
02FY2023 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$39,245
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TIDES FOUNDATION$39,245
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 63% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%ACCELERATE CHANGE INC: $25k → 16%CENTER FOR COMMON GROUND: $100k → 10%TIDES FOUNDATION: $60k → 10%PRIORITIES USA FOUNDATION: $20k → 14%LABOR NEIGHBOR RESEARCH AND TRAINING CENTER INC: $50k → 23%VOTEORG: $70k → 10%TIDES FOUNDATION: $39k → 10%THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER: $150k → 14%HOPEWELL FUND: $100k → 14%NEW VENTURE FUND: $100k → 14%THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER: $20k → 14%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.
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
Democracy Works Inc

The organization's mission is to leverage web-technologies to improve civic engagement and voter education.

Civil Rights
2
Voteamerica

The mission of voteamerica is to strengthen united states democracy by increasing voter turnout.

Civil Rights
3
Verified Voting Foundation

Strengthen democracy for all voters by promoting the responsible use of technology in all elections.

—
4
Priorities Usa

Priorities usa exists to activate & empower americans. through digital communications investments & state-of-the-art research, we fight to mobilize every american possible on the issues that matter to them while ensuring the democratic…

Civil Rights
5
Npr Foundation

The npr foundation ("foundation") is organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of its sole supported organization, national public radio, inc. ("npr inc."). the foundation supports npr inc. through various activities such as…

—
6
Upturn Inc

Upturn advances equity and justice in the design, governance, and use of technology.

—
7
American Policy Ventures Foundation F/K/a American Policy Ventures Inc

American policy ventures foundation is dedicated to reducing polarization and fostering cross-partisan problem-solving on important issues.

Public Benefit
8
Register America

The organization is founded for social welfare purposes, including assisting with voter registration and advocating for policies which lead to increased voter registration in the united states.

—
9
Discourse Labs Inc

Discourse labs provides research-backed tools and resources for productive public dialogue. we believe people should have the tools, technology, and skills to engage in productive public dialogue using credible information.

—
10
Indivisible Civics

The mission of indivisible civics is to build civic leadership to empower a grassroots movement that's advancing progressive values and policies. it educates and builds the capacity of grassroots activists with organizing support,…

Civil Rights
11
Democracy Forward

See schedule o.this organization seeks to build collective power to defend and advance a vibrant democracy that benefits all people.

—
12
Pew Research Center

Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan "fact tank" that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. Pew Research Center generates a foundation of facts that enriches the public dialogue and…

Social Science
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Accelerate Change Inc; the most unlike its peers is Labor Neighbor Research & Training Center. 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

9 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.

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

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
3/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER: $170,000 · Civil RightsTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTERVOTEORG: $70,000 · Civil RightsVOTEORGACCELERATE CHANGE INC: $25,000 · Civil RightsACCELERATE CHANGE INCPRIORITIES USA FOUNDATION: $20,000 · Civil RightsPRIORITIES USA FOUNDATIONHOPEWELL FUND: $100,000 · PhilanthropyHOPEWELL FUNDTIDES FOUNDATION: $99,245 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUNDATIONCenter for Common Ground: $100,000 · Public BenefitCenter for Comm…NEW VENTURE FUND: $100,000 · EnvironmentNEW VENTURE FUN…Labor Neighbor Research & Training Center: $50,000 · Community Improvement
Civil Rights$285,000Philanthropy$199,245Public Benefit$100,000Environment$100,000Community Improvement$50,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER: $170,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetCenter for Common Ground: $100,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHOPEWELL FUND: $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $99,245 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetVOTEORG: $70,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetPRIORITIES USA FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Harding Rock Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Harding Rock Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Harding Rock Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Harding Rock Fund through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 9 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Harding Rock’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