· Public charity
Institute for Policy Studies
The INSTITUTE FOR POLICY STUDIES (the institute) is a 60-year-old organization that is dedicated to building a more equitable, ecologically sustainable, and peaceful society.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 1 grants below total $250,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $258,945 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $8,945 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ECONOMIC HARDSHIP REPORTING PROJECT | $250,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 95% of your 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.
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 +32% since the first grant, against +8% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
ECONOMIC HARDSHIP REPORTING PROJECT3× · 2021–2024 · $1.6M · revenue 0% · 83% of their budget- CFCENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY2× · 2020–2021 · $70k · revenue +32%
- NMNEW MEXICO ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER2× · 2022–2023 · $55k · revenue +182%
Funded once
Repairers of the Breachone grant, 2019 · $84k · revenue -41%- STSOJOURNER TRUTH SCHOOL FOR SOCIAL CHANGE LEADERSHIP INCone grant, 2020 · $56k · revenue -20%
- BBBALTIMORE BROTHERS INCone grant, 2019 · $52k
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 union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
The climate institute is organized for the purpose of educating the general public and policy makers as to the gravity of potential climate change, exploring the policy implications of the latest scientific findings on climate modelling…
To research and develop centrist policy ideas.
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.
The Breakthrough Institute is a research center that identifies and promotes technological solutions to environmental and human development challenges.
The Institute for New Global Politics is a California-based educational nonprofit corporation organized and operated exclusively for charitable purposes. It is an independent and nonpartisan thinktank dedicated to educating the general…
The organization is devoted to anticipating, analyzing and addressing core systemic risks to security in the 21st century, with special examination of the ways in which these risks intersect and exacerbate one another. see schedule o for…
Free press was created to give people a voice in the crucial decisions that shape our media. we believe that positive social change, racial justice and meaningful engagement in public life require equitable access to technology, diverse…
The alliance for just deliberation on solar geoengineering (dsg) is a charitable, scientific and educational organization dedicated to building just and inclusive deliberation about research and potential use of solar geoengineering. solar…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Movement Strategy Center and the most unlike its peers is Retro Report Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
13 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. 13 of the 14 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 ECONOMIC HARDSHIP REPORTING PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Repairers of the Breach ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY ↗
- Who funds SOJOURNER TRUTH SCHOOL FOR SOCIAL CHANGE LEADERSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds NEW MEXICO ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds MOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER ↗
- Who funds WK Kellogg Foundation ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB ↗
- Who funds RETRO REPORT INC ↗
- Who funds VOICES FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds MAGNUM CULTURAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY ↗
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: Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Ford Foundation · Tides Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile 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 Institute for Policy Studies 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% 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.