· Public charity
Justice Innovation Inc
The center for justice innovation is a non-profit organization that works to create a fair, effective, and humane justice system and build strong, thriving communities.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2022–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 87 grants below total $5,622,124 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $5,791,915 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $169,791 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 $10k29 grants · $255k
- $10k–50k31 grants · $622k
- $50k–250k22 grants · $2.4M
- $250k+5 grants · $2.4M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| RESEARCH FOUNDATION OF CUNY | $1,120,219 |
| NPC RESEARCH | $371,455 |
| GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY | $304,671 |
| TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK | $302,853 |
| JUSTLEADERSHIPUSA INC | $276,756 |
| GWEN WRIGHT DBA CHANGE MATTERS | $224,667 |
| THE OSBORNE ASSOCIATION | $218,750 |
| WHY NOT PROSPER INC | $216,936 |
| UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM | $156,200 |
| FOUNTAIN HOUSE INC | $142,044 |
| STATE OF OREGON JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT | $127,277 |
| COOK COUNTY STATES ATTORNEYS OFFICE | $117,932 |
| MDRC | $113,956 |
| CHOICE OF NEW ROCHELLE INC DBA CHOICE OF NY | $113,065 |
| FRIENDS OF RECOVERY OF DELAWARE AND OTSEGO COUNTIES INC | $109,535 |
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 (FY22–25, $714k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 68% 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 8% of Justice Innovation Inc’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.
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 0% since the first grant, against -1% for the ones you funded once.
34 repeat relationships — 25 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 60 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 58% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.2M 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
- TOTHE OSBORNE ASSOCIATION INC4× · 2022–2025 · $685k · revenue +12%
- EIEAC INC2× · 2023–2024 · $582k · revenue +9%
- LSLEGAL SERVICES NYC3× · 2022–2024 · $375k · revenue +42%
Funded once
- TFTHE FORTUNE SOCIETY INCgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $1.7M · revenue +38%
- BTBrownsville Think Tank Matters Incone grant, 2022 · $596k · revenue +18% · 25% of their budget
- ELELITE LEARNERS INCone grant, 2022 · $315k · revenue -7%
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 center for justice innovation is a non-profit organization that works to create a fair, effective, and humane justice system and build strong, thriving communities.
The legal action center (lac) uses legal policy strategies to fight discrimination, build health equity, and restore opportunity for people with arrest and conviction records, substance use disorders, and hiv or aids.
The child center of ny strengthens children and families with skills, opportunities, and emotional support to build healthy, successful lives.
Oad strives to ensure that poor people convicted of felonies receive full and equal access to justice by providing exceptional appellate representation, improving the quality of indigent defense representation through education & training,…
To break the cycle of abuse and violence - domestic, sexual and child by providing services that create hope, restore lives and drive social change through education and community collaboration
Positively impacting the lives of our clients and their communities by providing services that facilitate skill development, enhance responsible citizenship, and increase overall well-being.
To be a leading provider of innovative services that enable individuals to become healthy, productive and self-sufficient.
The alliance leads new york citys mission to end sexual violence through education, prevention programming, research, and policy change. until we end sexual violence in all forms, we will be here for all survivors and the organizations…
Avenues for justice operates a progressive diversion program for nyc court-involved and at-risk youth, ages 13 to 24, through adapted hybrid online and onsite programming, and 24/7 mentorship with community-based court advocates, the…
Safe shores provides survivor-centered intervention, hope and healing for children and families affected by abuse, trauma and violence in the district of columbia, and works to prevent and end child abuse and neglect through promising…
Cfr's mission is to defend the rights of parents and youth through free, holistic interdisciplinary legal and social work representation.
To provide a variety of services to criminal justice organizations and defendants to enable the pre-trial process to operate with greater efficiency and fairness and gathers specified research data on the process.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Eac Inc and the most unlike its peers is New York 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.
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 34 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 10% 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.
78 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. 78 of the 119 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 THE FORTUNE SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds Research Foundation of the City University of New York ↗
- Who funds FUND FOR THE CITY OF NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds THE OSBORNE ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds Brownsville Think Tank Matters Inc ↗
- Who funds EAC INC ↗
- Who funds FUND FOR PUBLIC HEALTH IN NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds YWCA OF SOUTHERN ARIZONA ↗
- Who funds LEGAL SERVICES NYC ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR ALTERNATIVE SENTENCING AND EMPLOYMENT SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds CROSSROADS ANTI-RACISM ORGANIZING & TRAINING ↗
- Who funds ELITE LEARNERS INC ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds JUSTLEADERSHIPUSA INC ↗
- Who funds Why Not Prosper Inc ↗
- Who funds FOUNTAIN HOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds CHOICE OF NEW ROCHELLE INC ↗
- Who funds THE BROOKLYN INSTITUTE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR URBAN PEDAGOGY INC ↗
- Who funds MDRC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF RECOVERY DEDICATED TO OTHERS INC ↗
- Who funds JACOB A RIIS NEIGHBORHOOD SETTLEMENT ↗
- Who funds TOTAL COMMUNITY ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds FAMILY COUNSELING SERVICES OF CORTLAND COUNTY 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: National Children's Alliance Inc · Mother Cabrini Health Foundation Inc · Brooklyn Community Foundation · Lily Auchincloss Foundation Inc · The New York Bar Foundation · Pinkerton Foundation · Surdna Foundation Inc · Research Foundation of the City University of New York · Finger Lakes Performing Provider System Inc · The Recycling Partnership Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · The Hyde and Watson 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 Justice Innovation Inc 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.
- Prevention Education Inc — 39% of income from government
- Connecticut Institute for Refugees and Immigrants Inc — 37% 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.