· Private foundation
Integrity Media Nfp
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 FY2023–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k8 grants · $43k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $70k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $300k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $150,000 |
| PEOPLE POWER INITIATIVES | $100,000 |
| COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR SCHEERPOST | $50,000 |
| NEIU FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| INVISIBLE INSTITUTE | $25,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $10,000 |
| BAY AREA VIDEO COALITION | $10,000 |
| CONSORTIUM FOR INDEPENDENT JOURNALISM | $7,500 |
| BREAKTHROUGH BT MEDIA | $5,000 |
| MIDDLE EAST CULTURAL AND CHARITABLE SOCIETY | $5,000 |
| MEDIA FREEDOM FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE | $5,000 |
| UNCHAINED TV | $5,000 |
| FRACTURED ATLAS | $5,000 |
| BASED POLITICS | $5,000 |
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 (FY23–23, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, 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.
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 +43% since the first grant, against +19% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 10 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, 45% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $225k 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
- IIInvisible Institute2× · 2023–2024 · $33k · revenue +120%
- TCThe Consortium for Independent Journalism Inc2× · 2023–2024 · $15k · revenue +17%
- MFMedia Freedom Foundation2× · 2023–2024 · $13k · revenue +43%
Funded once
- QIQUINCY INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIBLE STATECRAFTone grant, 2023 · $8k · revenue -38%
- CDCOMMON DREAMS INCgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $8k · revenue +42%
- DADEMOCRACY AT WORKone grant, 2023 · $8k
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 educate journalists and the public, and foster public debate, about improving political journalism to reflect public needs and hold the powerful accountable.
To teach and disseminate educational materials to the public.
IMI amplifies the reach and impact of the work produced by our partner journalists,public intellectuals and editorial teams on the leading issues of our times. The goal is to educate, inspire, and collaborate with movements and visionaries…
First Look Institute supports fearless investigative journalism, innovative and cinematic nonfiction filmmaking, and press freedom initiatives to protect the right to a free and open society and press.
Mission:To provide ideology-free media platforms representing balanced news and educational forums to inform and increase critical thinking and engagement.
To foster freedom of speech, a competitive media and communications industry, and excellence in journalism.
Injustice Watch is a Chicago-based nonprofit journalism organization that examines issues of equity and justice in the court system.
Disseminate information and education about pertinent economic, social and governmental topics, via print, web and other media to educate the public about the principles of LIbertarianism.
Through in-depth and thought-provoking journalism, prism reflects the lived experiences of people most impacted by injustice. As an independent and nonprofit newsroom LED by journalists of color, we tell stories from the ground up: to…
The Independent Berkeley Student Publishing Co., Inc. (The Daily Californian) is an independent newspaper that trains UC Berkeley students for careers in journalism and business. The paper and its digital products are the primary source…
To use digital media for the purpose of educating and engaging the public in topics regarding inequality and imbalance of power in america.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is People Power Initiatives Inc and the most unlike its peers is Institute for the Advancement of Journalistic Clarity. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
18 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. 18 of the 24 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 PEOPLE POWER INITIATIVES INC ↗
- Who funds Invisible Institute ↗
- Who funds NORTHEASTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds The Consortium for Independent Journalism Inc ↗
- Who funds Media Freedom Foundation ↗
- Who funds The Bay Area Video Coalition Incorporated ↗
- Who funds QUINCY INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIBLE STATECRAFT ↗
- Who funds COMMON DREAMS INC ↗
- Who funds FREEDOM OF THE PRESS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FAIRNESS & ACCURACY IN REPORTING INC ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF JOURNALISTIC CLARITY ↗
- Who funds INDEPENDENT WORLD TELEVISION INC ↗
- Who funds TRUTHOUT ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds UnchainedTV ↗
- Who funds BreakthroughBT Media Inc ↗
- Who funds MIDDLE EAST CULTURAL AND CHARITABLE SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds FRACTURED ATLAS 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: John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · The Ford Foundation · Lannan Foundation · Park Foundation Inc · The Chicago Community Trust · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Impactassetsinc · Tides Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc
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 Integrity Media Nfp 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 Integrity Media Nfp?
Find your warmest path to Integrity Media Nfp 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.