· Private foundation
Henry J Fox Fund
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CONTRA COSTA JEWISH DAY SCHOOL | $4,000 |
| CONGREGATION BETH ISRAEL | $3,500 |
| SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER | $3,000 |
| WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN | $2,500 |
| GREEN AMERICA | $2,500 |
| AMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEE | $2,000 |
| LAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY | $2,000 |
| INTERFAITH WORKSCOMMUNITY MINISTRIES | $2,000 |
| ARKANSAS ABORTION SUPPORT NETWORK | $2,000 |
| AID-ARKANSAS IMMIGRANT DEFENSE | $2,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREAT PLAINS | $2,000 |
| EARTH JUSTICE LEGAL DEFENSE | $2,000 |
| FOOD & WATER WATCH | $2,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND | $2,000 |
| GREAT OLD BROADS FOR WILDERNESS | $2,000 |
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 (FY20–24, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +50% since the first grant, against +26% for the ones you funded once.
70 repeat relationships — 53 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 21 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 71% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $23k 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
- SPSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC5× · 2020–2024 · $15k · revenue +13%
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED5× · 2020–2024 · $14k · revenue +121%
WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC3× · 2021–2024 · $13k · revenue +167%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $5k
- WWWHOLE WOMEN'S HEALTH ALLIANCEone grant, 2022 · $3k
- AAAJC ARKANSAS JUSTICE COLLECTIVEone grant, 2021 · $2k
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 establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.
Environment next supports individuals, nonprofits and businesses around the world on solutions to complex climate issues. we provide leadership, outreach and communication support, grants, and investments to empower leaders and their ideas…
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
Connect conservationists and supporters, deploy resources to the field, provide conservationists with tools and support they need to succeed.
To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
Cdp north america, inc. 's ("cdp-na") vision for the future is a thriving economy that works for people and planet in the long term. we focus investors and companies on taking urgent action to build a truly sustainable economy by measuring…
To improve the efficacy, speed, cost, sustainability, and scaling of conservation solutions through harnessing exponential technology, innovation, and entrepreneurship to prevent human-induced extinction.
The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United States Public Interest Research Group Education Fund Inc and the most unlike its peers is National Wildlife Federation. 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 38 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.
53 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. 53 of the 118 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 SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FOOD & WATER WATCH ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds GREENPEACE INC ↗
- Who funds LAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON DRAMA SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds MARYLAND PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CONTRA COSTA JEWISH DAY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP ↗
- Who funds Abortion Fund of Ohio ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds GREATER WASHINGTON EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds A TOUCH OF LOVE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION ↗
- Who funds THE SHAKESPEARE THEATRE ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION 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.
Open a dossier: The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Hopewell Fund · McKesson Foundation Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Impactassetsinc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Ge Aerospace Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America
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 Henry J Fox 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.
- Preeclampsia Foundation Inc — 9% of income from government
- A Wider Circle Inc — 6% of income from government
- Oxfam-America 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.