Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Private foundation

Horizon Charitable Foundation

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.

$3.7M
Granted FY2023
24
Grants FY2023
8
States reached
$500k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

62% of Horizon Charitable Foundation’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Schwab Charitable Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 11 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2023, the last year Horizon Charitable Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 18 organizations, $4M. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

1
’19
10
’20
10
’21
12
’22
18
’23
11
’24

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

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 FY2019–2024.

Philanthropy$5.3MCivil Rights$3.8MEducation$2.6MPublic Benefit$1.4MHuman Services$650kSocial Science$500kInternational$354kArts & Culture$230kOther$0
02FY2023 · 24 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2023

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $85k
  • $50k–250k16 grants · $1.8M
  • $250k+4 grants · $1.8M
$100,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$121M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE$500,000
THIRD WAY INSTITUTE$500,000
NEW VENTURE FUND$500,000
DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING$300,000
EQUIS INSTITUTE$200,000
SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH COUNCIL$200,000
PROTECT DEMOCRACY PROJECT$150,000
NATIONAL REDISTRICTING FOUNDATION$150,000
THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER$150,000
THIRD WAY INSTITUTE$125,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER OHIO$100,000
VOTO LATINO FOUNDATION INC$100,000
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC$100,000
REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION$100,000
THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC$100,000
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 (FY20–24, $740k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%THORN: $50k → 14%PROJECT 68 EDUCATION FUND INC: $70k → 15%WORKMONEY FOUNDATION INC: $500k → 17%THORN: $50k → 14%ASSOCIATION TO BENEFIT CHILDREN: $10k → 17%NIDO DE ESPERANZA CHARITABLE SOCIETY: $20k → 17%NIDO DE ESPERANZA CHARITABLE SOCIETY: $20k → 17%NIDO DE ESPERANZA CHARITABLE SOCIETY: $20k → 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

WA
MT
IL
WI
NY
MA
OH
PA
CA
CO
NE
VA
MD
DC
AL
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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 17% of Horizon Charitable Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.

Horizon Charitable Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

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.

67%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$6.0M · 14 repeat orgs$3.0M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +34% since the first grant, against +22% for the ones you funded once.

14 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2023, 3 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call). Read against FY2023, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
14

Total granted

$6.0M
$976k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+34%
+22%

Still filing today

100%
86%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 31% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.4M went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
Civil RightsHuman ServicesEducationInternationalCrime & LegalHealthOther

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

  • AL
    ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE
    4× · 2021–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +34%
  • WILLIAM J BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE INC
    2× · 2019–2021 · $800k · revenue +182%
  • TW
    THIRD WAY INSTITUTE
    2× · 2022–2023 · $750k · revenue +16%

Funded once

  • VR
    VOTER REGISTRATION PROJECTgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $250k · revenue +43%
  • AA
    All Americans Votegraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $200k · revenue +111%
  • CE
    Civic Education Fund
    one grant, 2021 · $200k · revenue -95%

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
American Civil Liberties Union Fund of the District of Columbia

Preservation of civil liberties through litigation and public education.

—
2
Pro Publica Inc

Pro publica is an independent, non-profit, pulitzer prize-winning newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest. our work focuses exclusively on truly important stories. [see continuation on schedule o] we produce…

Arts & Culture
3
Voteamerica

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

Civil Rights
4
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…

—
5
America's Newspapers

Providing research, education and practical information all aimed at optimizing newspapers' business operations, deepening their community engagement and enhancing the quality of their journalism.

Employment
6
Democracy Works Inc

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

Civil Rights
7
Center for Popular Democracy Inc

The center for popular democracy (cpd) and its affiliates know that everyday people have the power to change the world. we upend business and politics as usual to forge a representative, multiracial government and society where we all…

Public Benefit
8
American Gas Association

American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…

—
9
Center for American Progress

The center for american progress (cap) is an independent nonpartisan policy institute that is dedicated to improving the lives of all americans through bold, progressive ideas, as well as strong leadership and concerted action. our aim is…

Civil Rights
10
Open Markets Institute

The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.

Education
11
The Campaign Legal Center Inc

The nonpartisan campaign legal center advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every american's rights to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic…

Crime & Legal
12
Us Digital Response

U.s. digital response is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that helps governments, nonprofits, and public entities respond quickly to critical public needs. the organization serves the public by leveraging a network of pro bono…

Public Safety & Disaster

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Voter Registration Project and the most unlike its peers is Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. 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 backsteadyPregnancy Support ServicesJewish Community Organizati…Immigrant Worker SupportWomen & Girls Leadership De…Policy Research and AdvocacyCommunity Foundations
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 22 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%9%<5yr14%18%5–10yr19%18%10–20yr16%18%20–35yr13%11%35–55yr16%25%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%7%<5yr14%14%5–10yr19%20%10–20yr16%37%20–35yr13%5%35–55yr16%17%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 9% of your grantees by number, and just 7% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/47
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,518

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.

05the grantee network

46 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. 46 of the 49 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
46/46
Grantees still filing
31/46
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC — $3,300,000 · PhilanthropyDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING…HOPEWELL FUND — $300,000 · PhilanthropyHOPEWELL FUNDAMERICA ISRAEL DEMOCRACY COALITION — $200,000 · PhilanthropyPEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC — $154,000 · Philanthropy+3 more — $250,000 · Philanthropy+3 moreANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE — $1,100,000 · Civil RightsANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUETHIRD WAY INSTITUTE — $750,000 · Civil RightsTHIRD WAY INSTITUTEGLOBAL PROJECT AGAINST HATE AND EXTREMISM INC — $500,000 · Civil RightsGLOBAL PROJECT AGAINST HATE A…NATIONAL REDISTRICTING FOUNDATION — $450,000 · Civil RightsNATIONAL REDISTRICTING FOUNDA…PROTECT DEMOCRACY PROJECT — $300,000 · Civil RightsPROTECT DEMOCRACY PROJECTTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER — $270,000 · Civil RightsTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTE…All Americans Vote — $200,000 · Civil RightsVOTO LATINO FOUNDATION INC — $200,000 · Civil RightsACCELERATE CHANGE INC — $200,000 · Civil Rights+1 more — $50,000 · Civil RightsTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA — $1,150,000 · EducationTRUSTEES OF THE UN…WILLIAM J BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE INC — $800,000 · EducationWILLIAM J BRENNAN …MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA — $500,000 · EducationMEDIA MATTERS FOR …WORKING AMERICA EDUCATION FUND — $100,000 · Education+1 more — $1,000 · EducationNEW VENTURE FUND — $1,165,000 · EnvironmentWORKMONEY FOUNDATION INC — $500,000 · Human ServicesTHORN — $100,000 · Human ServicesPROJECT 68 EDUCATION FUND INC — $70,000 · Human ServicesNIDO DE ESPERANZA CHARITABLE SOCIETY — $60,000 · Human Services+1 more — $10,000 · Human ServicesREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION — $300,000 · OtherREPRODUCTIVE FR…VOTER REGISTRATION PROJECT — $250,000 · OtherVOTER REGISTRAT…COMMUNITY FUNDS INC — $100,000 · OtherSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC — $300,000 · OtherSOUTHERN POVERT…Central Fund of Israel — $200,000 · OtherCentral Fund of…EQUIS INSTITUTE — $200,000 · OtherEQUIS INSTITUTECivic Education Fund — $200,000 · OtherCivic Education…PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER OHIO — $100,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC — $100,000 · OtherCENTER FOR TECHNOLOGY AND CIVIC LIFE — $150,000 · OtherCENTER FOR TECH…+9 more — $165,000 · Other+9 moreSOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH COUNCIL — $400,000 · Social ScienceTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC — $100,000 · Social Science
Philanthropy$4,204,000Civil Rights$4,020,000Education$2,551,000Environment$1,165,000Human Services$740,000Other$2,065,000Social Science$500,000

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 budgetDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC — $3,300,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND — $1,165,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA — $1,150,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE — $1,100,000 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetWILLIAM J BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE INC — $800,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetTHIRD WAY INSTITUTE — $750,000 over 2y, 3.4% of budgetGLOBAL PROJECT AGAINST HATE AND EXTREMISM INC — $500,000 over 3y, 70% of budgetWORKMONEY FOUNDATION INC — $500,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetMEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA — $500,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetNATIONAL REDISTRICTING FOUNDATION — $450,000 over 4y, 1.5% of budgetSOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH COUNCIL — $400,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION — $300,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetHOPEWELL FUND — $300,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC — $300,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetPROTECT DEMOCRACY PROJECT — $300,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER — $270,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetVOTER REGISTRATION PROJECT — $250,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetAll Americans Vote — $200,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetEQUIS INSTITUTE — $200,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetVOTO LATINO FOUNDATION INC — $200,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetACCELERATE CHANGE INC — $200,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCivic Education Fund — $200,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetAMERICA ISRAEL DEMOCRACY COALITION — $200,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetCentral Fund of Israel — $200,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPEF ISRAEL ENDOWMENT FUNDS INC — $154,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCENTER FOR TECHNOLOGY AND CIVIC LIFE — $150,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetWORKING AMERICA EDUCATION FUND — $100,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION — $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC — $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER OHIO — $100,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetGoodnation Foundation Inc — $100,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHORN — $100,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC — $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPROJECT 68 EDUCATION FUND INC — $70,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetNIDO DE ESPERANZA CHARITABLE SOCIETY — $60,000 over 3y, 2.0% of budgetDEMOCRACY MATTERS FOUNDATION — $50,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetBRADY CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE — $50,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetAmalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc — $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetENGENDERHEALTH INC — $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC — $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetASSOCIATION TO BENEFIT CHILDREN — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLITTLE SISTERS OF THE ASSUMPTION FAMILY HEALTH SERVICE INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWEST SIDE CENTER FOR COMMUNITY LIFE — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetChristian Herald Association Inc — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER WASHINGTON EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHER JUSTICE INC — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

Silicon Valley Commun…Tides FoundationThe William & Flora H…Jewish Community Fede…Gs Donor Advised Phil…The Goldman Sachs Cha…The San Francisco Fou…Boston Foundation IncCatena FoundationImpactassetsincWellspring Philanthro…Jewish Communal Fund
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA19.4× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Tides Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · The San Francisco Foundation · Boston Foundation Inc · Catena Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · Jewish Communal Fund

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 Horizon Charitable Foundation 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 · 20%5%19%42%75%your share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get 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 · 0–90%
    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 49 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. 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