· Private foundation
Janelia Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NCA Philip Randolph Institute | $20,000 |
| Common Defense Education Fund | $20,000 |
| Friends Committee on National | $15,000 |
| Hope Border Institute | $15,000 |
| RAICES | $15,000 |
| NC Asian Americans Coming Together | $15,000 |
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 (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 81% 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 5% of Janelia 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.
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.
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.
E3g is a leading international not-for-profit think tank specialising in climate diplomacy harnessing expertise in the politics and economics of climate change.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.
Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.
Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.
Using legal advocacy to make advances in science and technology safer for people and the planet.
Advocates for the environment is organizaed to educate the public concerning the law and the environment, to provide low-cost legal services to the public and other nonprofit organizations, and to use legal means such as litigation to…
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
WEF's mission is inspiring the water community in pursuit of human and environmental well-being. WEF is a global environmental leader committed to water quality education and technical best practices. WEF connects water professionals;…
The Center for Environmental Law & Policy is a statewide organization whose mission is to protect, preserve and restore Washington's waters through education, advocacy, policy reform, and public interest litigation.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New Venture Fund and the most unlike its peers is N C a Philip Randolph Institute Inc. 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.
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 28 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 7% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
26 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. 26 of the 32 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 PUBLIC CITIZEN FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL ZERO ↗
- Who funds COMMON DEFENSE EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds URBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK ↗
- Who funds BROWN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT INC ↗
- Who funds WESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Texas Campaign for the Environment Fund ↗
- Who funds EDUCATION WORKS INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW INC ↗
- Who funds N C A PHILIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds Win Without War Education Fund ↗
- Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds Earthworks ↗
- Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
- Who funds FOOD & WATER WATCH ↗
- Who funds REFUGEE & IMMIGRANT CENTER FOR EDUCATION & LEGAL SERVICES ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR COALFIELD JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA CONSERVATION VOTERS ED FUND ↗
- Who funds HOPE BORDER INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds THE WATERSHED CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds NEW MEXICO VOICES FOR CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL GRANTMAKERS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds CONSULTATIVE GROUP ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC Biodiversity Funders Grp ↗
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: United States Energy Foundation · Windward Fund · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Tides Foundation · Rockefeller Family Fund Inc · Resources Legacy Fund · Maine Community Foundation Inc · New Venture Fund · The Energy Foundation · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · The Partnership Project 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 Janelia 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.
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 Janelia Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Janelia Foundation 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.