· Public charity
Hsaf
Promote advancements in early education, science, climate and human rights.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2019.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| COLOR OF CHANGE ORGANIZATION | $100,000 |
| NEW FLORIDA MAJORITY | $100,000 |
| INDIVISIBLE PROJECT | $75,000 |
| EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY ACTION FUND | $62,500 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE ACTION FUND | $50,000 |
| NRDC ACTION FUND INC | $50,000 |
| CALIFORNIA CALLS ACTION FUND | $50,000 |
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 (FY17–19, $150k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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.
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.
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 +130% since the first grant, against +37% for the ones you funded once.
4 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2019, 1 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (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 FY2019, 44% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $275k 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
- COCOLOR OF CHANGEORG EDUCATION FUND2× · 2018–2019 · $200k · revenue +29%
- CCCALIFORNIA CALLS ACTION FUND3× · 2017–2019 · $150k · revenue +498% · 26% of their budget
- TATIDES ADVOCACY2× · 2017–2018 · $90k · revenue +130%
Funded once
- STSave the Children Action Networkone grant, 2018 · $350k · revenue +7%
- FFFloridians for a Fair Democracy Incone grant, 2017 · $100k · revenue +190%
- SESTATE ENGAGEMENT FUNDone grant, 2018 · $100k · revenue -62%
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.
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…
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
One for democracy unlocks resources to build a healthy democracy by fostering meaningful relationships between philanthropists and the democracy leaders of our time.
Issue one is the leading crosspartisan political reform organization that educates the public, engages capitol hill, and advocates for solutions to fix our broken political system.
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…
The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.
Preservation of civil liberties through litigation and public education.
Fair democracy works to ensure that the roots of american democracy are healthy with strong voting rights and access, an engaged and informed electorate, an open and accountable government and trusted messengers engaging americans in civil…
Ca fwd drives action to identify solutions that can be taken to scale to meet the challenges the state is facing. the organization is driven by the belief that regional solutions across the state will help ensure economic, environmental,…
The mission of the organization is to educate the general public regarding issues of public policy and to promote and bring about advances in such areas of public policy. the organization promotes public policy change through education,…
To sustain, defend and provide the means to preserve the individual constitutional rights of all washingtonians, including freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom of movement, due…
The organization monitors legislation that could impact civil liberties and takes the necessary action to support or oppose such legislation.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Color of Changeorg Education Fund and the most unlike its peers is Floridians for a Fair Democracy Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
14 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. 14 of the 17 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 Save the Children Action Network ↗
- Who funds COLOR OF CHANGEORG EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY ACTION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA CALLS ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds FLORIDA RISING INC ↗
- Who funds Floridians for a Fair Democracy Inc ↗
- Who funds STATE ENGAGEMENT FUND ↗
- Who funds COLOROFCHANGEORG ↗
- Who funds TIDES ADVOCACY ↗
- Who funds INDIVISIBLE PROJECT ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds NRDC ACTION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds POWERPAC ORG ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE 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: Sixteen Thirty Fund · Tides Advocacy · Tides Foundation · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Fund for a Better Future Inc · The Heising-Simons Action 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 Hsaf 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Hsaf?
Find your warmest path to Hsaf 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.