· Private foundation
M Piuze Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
Read this first · the figures below need context
51% of M Piuze Foundation’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 58 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2023, the last year M Piuze Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 58 organizations, $3M. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2023
- Under $10k15 grants · $75k
- $10k–50k47 grants · $735k
- $50k–250k12 grants · $843k
- $250k+3 grants · $1.2M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION | $500,000 |
| WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK | $370,000 |
| AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION | $300,000 |
| CHIMPANZEE SANCTUARY NORTHWEST | $125,847 |
| CENTER FOR GREAT APES | $111,864 |
| SAVE THE CHIMPS INC | $97,881 |
| WORLD WILDLIFE FUND | $72,500 |
| NATURE CONSERVANCY | $62,500 |
| YELLOWSTONE TO YUKON | $62,500 |
| INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION | $60,000 |
| DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE | $50,000 |
| WILD AFRICA FUND | $50,000 |
| PUBLIC HEALTH ADVOCACY INSTITUTE | $50,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY | $50,000 |
| WILD AID | $50,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $390k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% 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 25% of M Piuze 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.
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 +54% since the first grant, against +8% for the ones you funded once.
81 repeat relationships — 67 still active in FY2023, 14 since wound down; 19 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call). Read against FY2023, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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 FY2024, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $193k 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
- AWAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC8× · 2017–2024 · $2.0M · revenue +54%
- NWNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION6× · 2018–2023 · $1.4M · revenue +87%
- WCWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC8× · 2017–2024 · $1.2M · revenue +302%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2017 · $100k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $80k
- TPTHE PREEMPTIVE LOVE COALITIONone grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue -71%
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.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
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…
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.
Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
IFAWs strategy focuses on improving the welfare of individual animals and the conservation status of wildlife populations in priority habitats through on-the-ground efforts community engagement and global advocacy. Our dual emphasis on…
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
Wildlife alliance is the leader in direct protection of forests and wildlife in tropical asia. our mission is to combat deforestation, biodiversity loss, climate change, and poverty by partnering with local communities and governments.…
Our mission is to act to conserve threatened species and ecosystems worldwide, choosing solutions that are sustainable, based on sound science and take into account human needs.
World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…
To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Heritage Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation. 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 26 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 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% 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.
77 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. 77 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 AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION ↗
- Who funds Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds MORGAN STANLEY GLOBAL IMPACT FUNDING TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds Defenders of Wildlife ↗
- Who funds Wildlife Conservation Society ↗
- Who funds WILDAID INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC HEALTH ADVOCACY INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds SAVE THE CHIMPS INC ↗
- Who funds CHIMPANZEE SANCTUARY NORTHWEST ↗
- Who funds Center for Orangutan & Chimpanzee Conservation Inc ↗
- Who funds SAMARITAN'S PURSE ↗
- Who funds Crystal Peaks Youth Ranch Co ↗
- Who funds Mission Pre-Born Inc ↗
- Who funds WORLD RELIEF CORP OF NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EVANGELICALS ↗
- Who funds THE CLEAR FUND ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds AMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC ↗
- Who funds THE JAMES STOREHOUSE INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds JUSTICE RISING INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds EXOTIC FELINE BREEDING COMPOUNDINC ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL CONSERVATION ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds HEIFER PROJECT INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds CHARITY GLOBAL 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: Thornton S Jr and Katrina D Glide Foundation · California Community Foundation · Servant Foundation · The Annenberg Foundation · Sempra Foundation · T Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving Inc · Shell USA Company Foundation · Arthur J Gallagher Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The US Charitable Gift Trust · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · American Endowment 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 M Piuze 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.
- National Marine Sanctuary Foundation — 88% of income from government
- World Relief Corp of National Association of Evangelicals — 67% of income from government
- Impact Melanoma Inc — 3% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 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.