Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Lever for Change

Our mission is to unlock significant philanthropic capital and accelerate social change around the world's biggest challenges, by helping philanthropists and philanthropic institutions source vetted, high-impact philanthropic opportunities and connecting nonprofits and problem solvers to significant amounts of philanthropic capital.

$175k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202024.

Environment$150kInternational$125kPhilanthropy$100kEducation$60kCivil Rights$60kEmployment$50kCommunity Improvement$35kAnimals$25kOther$0
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 5 grants below total $125,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $175,000 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $50,000 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.

$25,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$14M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
IGNITE$25,000
Power For All$25,000
Gallaudet University$25,000
Talent Beyond Boundaries Inc$25,000
Clinton Health Access Initiative Inc$25,000
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:

Your human-services grants (FY21–21, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Task Force For Global Health: $25k → 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

VT
WA
NY
MA
CA
NM
DC
GA
TX

Grants abroad, by region — $50k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$50k · 100% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: GENERAL HEALTHCARE SUPPORT · YOUTH RESILIENCY FUND

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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 26% of Lever for Change’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.

Lever for Changelessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 19% directed abroad (not shown)

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.

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.

60%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$335k · 6 repeat orgs$220k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +40% since the first grant, against +40% for the ones you funded once.

6 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
8

Total granted

$335k
$195k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+40%
+40%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
InternationalEducationCommunity ImprovementAnimalsEnvironmentHuman ServicesOther

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

  • O
    OneSky
    2× · 2022–2023 · $50k · revenue +58%
  • BARD COLLEGE
    2× · 2021–2022 · $50k · revenue +118%
  • TB
    TALENT BEYOND BOUNDARIES INC
    2× · 2021–2024 · $50k · revenue +40%

Funded once

  • National Domestic Workers Alliance Incgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $35k · revenue +73%
  • RD
    RURAL DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue +23%
  • NM
    National Marine Mammal Foundation Inc
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue -5%

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
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.

2
MRIGlobal

To improve the lives of people through innovative scientific and engineering research.

Science & Tech
3
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
4
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
5
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
6
Golden Gate University

Golden gate university prepares individuals to lead and serve by providing high quality, practice-based educational programs in law, taxation, business and related professions - as a nonprofit institution - in an innovative and challenging…

Education
7
Boston Architectural College

The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.

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
The Rand Corporation

Help improve policy and decision making through research and analysis.

Public Benefit
10
National Association of Corporate Directors

We empower directors and transform boards to be future ready.

Public Benefit
11
United States Telecom Association

See schedule oustelecom exists to ensure members can compete, grow and thrive to build a world where families, enterprises and communities are connected through the power of broadband.our member companies have committed a considerable…

12
Western Electricity Coordinating Council

To effectively and efficiently mitigate risks to the reliability and security of the western interconnection's bulk power system.

Public Benefit

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ignite and the most unlike its peers is Bard College. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

16 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
11/16
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Power for All — $75,000 · InternationalPower for AllOneSky — $50,000 · InternationalOneSkyTALENT BEYOND BOUNDARIES INC — $50,000 · InternationalTALENT BEYOND BOUNDARIES INCCLINTON HEALTH ACCESS INITIATIVE INC — $50,000 · InternationalCLINTON HEALTH ACCESS INITIATIVE INCHIMALAYAN CATARACT PROJECT INC — $25,000 · InternationalHIMALAYAN CATARACT PROJECT INCIGNITE — $60,000 · EducationIGNITEBARD COLLEGE — $50,000 · EducationBARD COLLEGEGALLAUDET UNIVERSITY — $25,000 · EducationGALLAUDET UNIVERSITYROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC — $100,000 · PhilanthropyROCKEFELLER PHILA…RURAL DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE — $25,000 · Community ImprovementRURAL DEVE…NEW MEXICO COMMUNITY CAPITAL — $25,000 · Community ImprovementNEW MEXICO…JUST COMMUNITY INC — $10,000 · Community ImprovementJUST COMMU…National Domestic Workers Alliance Inc — $35,000 · Civil RightsNational Marine Mammal Foundation Inc — $25,000 · AnimalsCalCef Innovations — $25,000 · EnvironmentTHE TASK FORCE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC — $25,000 · Human Services
International$250,000Education$135,000Philanthropy$100,000Community Improvement$60,000Civil Rights$35,000Animals$25,000Environment$25,000Human Services$25,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC — $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPower for All — $75,000 over 3y, 4.3% of budgetIGNITE — $60,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetOneSky — $50,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetBARD COLLEGE — $50,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTALENT BEYOND BOUNDARIES INC — $50,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetCLINTON HEALTH ACCESS INITIATIVE INC — $50,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNational Domestic Workers Alliance Inc — $35,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRURAL DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE — $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNational Marine Mammal Foundation Inc — $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCalCef Innovations — $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE TASK FORCE FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC — $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHIMALAYAN CATARACT PROJECT INC — $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNEW MEXICO COMMUNITY CAPITAL — $25,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetGALLAUDET UNIVERSITY — $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJUST COMMUNITY INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

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.

The Rockefeller FoundationNY19.3× affinity7 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Rockefeller Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Tides Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Lever for Change 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 · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely 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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Lever for Change?

    Find your warmest path to Lever for Change 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.

    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 16 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph