· Private foundation
Lippincott Foundation Inc
Its FY2025 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 FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k4 grants · $15k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Project Drawdown | $10,000 |
| FCNL Education Fund | $10,000 |
| Sylvia Earle Alliance Mission Blue | $10,000 |
| Rainforest Action Network | $10,000 |
| Ceres | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,500 |
| Union of Concerned Scientists | $5,000 |
| Let There Be Light International | $3,500 |
| Foundation Fighting Blindness | $513 |
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% 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.
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 +4% since the first grant, against -13% for the ones you funded once.
15 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 1 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, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $513 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
THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC7× · 2019–2025 · $38k · revenue +6%- TATHE ALLIANCE FOR CLIMATE PROTECTION5× · 2019–2023 · $28k · revenue +26%
- CICERES INC4× · 2022–2025 · $25k · revenue +29%
Funded once
- OWOTHER WORLDS INCone grant, 2017 · $13k
- MSMANAGEMENT SCIENCES FOR HEALTH INCone grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue -43%
Earth Island Institute Incgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +76%
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.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.
RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.
Conservation law foundation, inc. (clf) protects new england's environment for the benefit of all people and future generations. we use the law, science, and markets to create solutions that preserve and restore our natural resources,…
Rri's mission is to support local communities and indigenous peoples' struggles against poverty and marginalization by promoting greater global commitment and action towards policy, market, and legal reforms that secure their rights to…
The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.
Climateworks foundation's mission is to connect philanthropy, grantees, and strategic partners to build and deliver high-impact climate solutions that benefit all people.
To research and develop centrist policy ideas.
We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…
The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc and the most unlike its peers is Other Worlds Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
17 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. 17 of the 26 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 ENGAGING SCHOOLS INC ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON OFFICE ON LATIN AMERICA ↗
- Who funds FCNL EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds THE ALLIANCE FOR CLIMATE PROTECTION ↗
- Who funds CERES INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT DRAWDOWN ↗
- Who funds Sylvia Earle AllianceMission Blue ↗
- Who funds LET THERE BE LIGHT INTERNATIONAL LTBLI at dig ↗
- Who funds RAINFOREST TRUST ↗
- Who funds Rainforest Action Network ↗
- Who funds OTHER WORLDS INC ↗
- Who funds MANAGEMENT SCIENCES FOR HEALTH INC ↗
- Who funds Earth Island Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds SUNRISE MOVEMENT EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND ↗
- Who funds THE FOUNDATION FIGHTING BLINDNESS 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: Tides Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · 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 Lippincott Foundation 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Management Sciences for Health Inc — 67% of income from government
- Ceres Inc — 0% 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.