Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

International Citycounty Management Association

The international city/county management association (icma) is the world's premier local government leadership and management organization.

$2.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
28
Grants FY2025still arriving
16
States reached
$302k
Largest
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 69% of INTERNATIONAL CITYCOUNTY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2025 · 28 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 28 grants below total $1,616,659 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $2,238,541 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $621,882 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.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k21 grants · $467k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $841k
  • $250k+1 grant · $302k
$24,000
Median grant
16
States reached
$35M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE CADMUS GROUP LLC$301,716
NATIONAL FORUM FOR BLACK PUBLIC ADMINISTRATORS$225,247
NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES$187,268
NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE FOR TRIBAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONA$182,982
URBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK$140,684
WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE$104,550
INTERSTATE RENEWABLE ENERGY COUNCIL (IREC)$32,827
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION$27,052
CITY OF LA MARQUE$24,000
CITY OF NEWTON$24,000
TOWN OF PRESCOTT VALLEY$24,000
CITY OF NEEDLES$24,000
CITY OF DANVILLE$24,000
CITY OF REDWOOD CITY$24,000
TUNICA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS$24,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 68% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE FOR TRIBAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONA: $183k → 16%THE CADMUS GROUP LLC: $360k → 8%MEISTER CONSULTANTS GROUP: $67k → 16%NEIGHBORHOODS AGAINST STRONG MAYOR: $45k → 12%INTERSTATE RENEWABLE ENERGY COUNCIL (IREC): $33k → 14%THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $47k → 17%INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $71k → 14%USCAC SALES & DEVELOPMENT LLC: $139k → 12%NO BOSS MAYOR: $83k → 16%FHI360: $207k → 11%TOWN OF TARBORO: $35k → 21%NATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE: $65k → 12%THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP INC: $1.0M → 4%HOME INNOVATION RESEARCH: $58k → 11%THE CADMUS GROUP LLC: $302k → 8%WSP USA SOLUTIONS INC: $803k → 17%INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $35k → 14%NO BOSS MAYOR: $71k → 16%FHI360: $60k → 11%NATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE: $61k → 12%AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION: $106k → 14%THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP INC: $433k → 4%HOME INNOVATION RESEARCH: $38k → 11%THE CADMUS GROUP LLC: $74k → 8%WSP USA SOLUTIONS INC: $525k → 17%INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $32k → 14%AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION: $103k → 14%THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP INC: $115k → 4%THE CADMUS GROUP LLC: $74k → 8%AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION: $40k → 14%THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP INC: $82k → 4%AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION: $36k → 14%HARVARD KENNDEY SCHOLARSHIP: $33k → 8%HARVARD KENNEDY SCHOOL: $32k → 8%NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES: $187k → 14%NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES: $153k → 14%NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES: $103k → 14%INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES: $665k → 14%NATIONAL FORUM FOR BLACK PUBLIC ADMINISTRATORS: $225k → 14%INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES: $386k → 14%URBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK: $141k → 14%THE SOLAR FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $105k → 14%BANYAN GLOBAL INC: $102k → 14%WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $57k → 14%THE JAKE GROUP: $48k → 14%BANYAN GLOBAL INC: $39k → 14%WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $52k → 14%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

ME
IL
WI
NY
MA
OR
IA
OH
PA
NJ
CA
UT
CO
NE
VA
MD
AZ
KS
NC
DC
MS
GA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region — $509k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions, $463k to organizations and $46k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

East Asia and the Pacific$317k · 62% · 9 grants · 26 people

Stated purpose: CITIES FOR ENHANCED ENGAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE (CHANGE) PROGRAM · FELLOWSHIP STIPENDS

South Asia$122k · 24% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CTA-CAPACITY BUILDING AND SUSTAINABILITY INITIATIVE (CTA-CBSI) PROGRAM

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$70k · 14% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: ICMA EUROPE GRANT

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.

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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$7.7M · 28 repeat orgs$1.2M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +2% since the first grant, against -39% for the ones you funded once.

28 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2025, 23 since wound down; 22 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

28
14

Total granted

$7.7M
$427k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+2%
-39%

Still filing today

29%
21%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 50% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $796k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalPublic BenefitCommunity ImprovementEducationEnvironmentPhilanthropyOther

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

  • INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES
    2× · 2017–2018 · $1.1M · revenue +1%
  • NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES
    3× · 2023–2025 · $443k · revenue +6%
  • FH
    Family Health International Inc
    2× · 2019–2020 · $267k · revenue +2%

Funded once

  • US
    USCAC SALES & DEVELOPMENT LLC
    one grant, 2017 · $139k
  • TJ
    THE JAKE GROUP
    one grant, 2020 · $48k
  • NA
    NEIGHBORHOODS AGAINST STRONG MAYOR
    one grant, 2021 · $45k

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
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners

Founded in 1889, the national association of regulatory utility commisioners (naruc) is a non-profit organization dedicated to representing the state public service commisions who regulate the utilities that provide essential services such…

2
Aacsb International - the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business

Aacsb international provides quality assurance of business school programs, the latest in business education intelligence, thought leadership, and learning and development services.

Education
3
Institute of International Bankers

The iib represents the interests of the international banking community before u.s. legislative/regulatory bodies liaises with international regulatory bodies serves as a source of information to the media and other interested parties…

4
The International Institute for Strategic Studies - Us

To provide accurate, objective information and analysis on international strategic issues for legislators, diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business leaders, economists, the military, defense commentators, journalists,…

International
5
International Federation of Accountants

Ifac acts in the public interest and has no profit-making purpose. ifac serves the public interest by: speaking out and engaging as the voice for the global profession; leading and developing a future-ready accountancy profession; and…

Education
6
National Association of College and University Attorneys

To advance the practice of higher education attorneys for the benefit of the institutions they serve.

7
National Association of Corporate Directors

We empower directors and transform boards to be future ready.

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
International Life Sciences Institute

Ilsi is a global, nonprofit federation dedicated to generating and advancing emerging science and groundbreaking research to ensure foods are safe, nutritious and sustainable, and that they improve planetary and human health and well-being…

Science & Tech
10
American Geophysical Union

Agu's mission is to advance and support an inclusive community of earth and space scientists and partners dedicated to discovery and solutions to societal challenges. agu seeks to catalyze discovery and solutions to scientific and societal…

Science & Tech
11
United States Naval Institute

Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.

12
National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities

The National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities (NAICU) serves as the unified voice for the 1,700 private, nonprofit colleges and universities in our nation. (continued on Schedule O)

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Institute for Sustainable Communities and the most unlike its peers is California Lutheran University. 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 backsteadyGovernment Accountability R…Public University Foundatio…Asian American Advocacy & H…Faith-Based Liberal Arts Co…Christian Missionary Organi…Environmental Advocacy Orga…
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 43 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%0%<5yr14%10%5–10yr19%5%10–20yr16%15%20–35yr13%50%35–55yr16%20%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%0%<5yr14%5%5–10yr19%0%10–20yr16%6%20–35yr13%70%35–55yr16%19%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% 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%0/65
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,500

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.

04the grantee network

21 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 21 of the 66 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/21
Grantees still filing
13/21
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP INC — $1,629,533 · OtherTHE LOUIS BERGER GROUP INCWSP USA SOLUTIONS INC — $1,328,450 · OtherWSP USA SOLUTIONS INCTHE CADMUS GROUP LLC — $824,554 · OtherTHE CADMUS GROUP LLCNATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES — $443,041 · OtherNATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIESCHESTERFIELD COUNTY VIRGINIA — $229,625 · Other+44 more — $1,882,735 · Other+44 moreINSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES — $1,050,978 · InternationalINSTITUTE FOR SUSTAI…Family Health International Inc — $267,020 · InternationalFamily Health Intern…WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE — $214,244 · InternationalWORLD RESOURCES INST…INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL — $137,792 · InternationalINTERNATIONAL ECONOM…+1 more — $5,618 · InternationalAmerican Planning Association — $318,835 · Community ImprovementNATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE — $158,458 · Community ImprovementNATIONAL FORUM FOR BLACK PUBLIC ADMINISTRATORS INC — $225,247 · Public BenefitAmericans Against Double Taxation Inc — $24,625 · Public BenefitINSTITUTE FOR BUILDING TECHNOLOGY AND SAFETY — $22,800 · Public Benefit+1 more — $8,750 · Public BenefitPresident and Fellows of Harvard College — $157,500 · EducationTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK — $47,373 · EducationCALIFORNIA LUTHERAN UNIVERSITY — $10,000 · EducationGrand Canyon University — $10,000 · EducationURBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK — $140,684 · EnvironmentUNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC — $10,000 · Philanthropy
Other$6,337,938International$1,675,652Community Improvement$477,293Public Benefit$281,422Education$224,873Environment$140,684Philanthropy$10,000

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 budgetINSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES — $1,050,978 over 2y, 13% of budgetNATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES — $443,041 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetAmerican Planning Association — $318,835 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetFamily Health International Inc — $267,020 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE — $214,244 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE — $158,458 over 4y, 13% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College — $157,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL — $137,792 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetTHE SOLAR FOUNDATION — $109,953 over 4y, 1.5% of budgetSTATE AND LOCAL LEGAL CENTER — $80,000 over 5y, 3.7% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK — $47,373 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR BUILDING TECHNOLOGY AND SAFETY — $22,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA LUTHERAN UNIVERSITY — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGrand Canyon University — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL URBAN DEVELOPMENT — $8,750 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetTHE ASIA FOUNDATION — $5,618 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.

  • Who funds INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES
  • Who funds NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES
  • Who funds American Planning Association
  • Who funds Family Health International Inc
  • Who funds NATIONAL FORUM FOR BLACK PUBLIC ADMINISTRATORS INC
  • Who funds WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE
  • Who funds NATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE
  • Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College
  • Who funds URBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
  • Who funds THE SOLAR FOUNDATION
  • Who funds STATE AND LOCAL LEGAL CENTER
  • Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK
  • Who funds INTERSTATE RENEWABLE ENERGY COUNCIL

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.

National League of Cities Institute IncDC17.2× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National League of Cities Institute Inc · The Kresge Foundation · Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation Inc · Jsi Research & Training Institute Inc · National Recreation and Park Association · Center for Technology and Civic Life · The Rockefeller Foundation · Gates Foundation · AARP · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Network for Good · 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 International Citycounty Management Association 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
202122232425
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 10%
  • Institute for Sustainable Communities100% of income from government
  • University of Central Florida Research Foundation Inc10% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY2025

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 66 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph