Skip to content

· Public charity

Madre Inc

MADRE INC.'s mission is to advance women's human rights by meeting urgent needs in communities and building lasting solutions to the crises women face.

$4.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

Education$317kPublic Benefit$51kPublic Safety & Disaster$29kInternational$20kHealth$20kCivil Rights$14k
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $33,758, the rows itemized in this filing. The $4,503,459 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $4,469,701 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$20,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$28M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE$20,000
MOBILITY INTERNATIONAL USA$13,758
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 92% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Grassroots International: $9k → 16%MIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE: $20k → 10%CUNY SCHOOL OF LAW FOUNDATION: $100k → 13%Columbia University: $73k → 17%Center for Popular Democracy: $21k → 20%Congression Prog Caucus Ctr: $27k → 14%MOBILITY INTERNATIONAL USA: $14k → 15%The Praxis Project: $20k → 10%CUNY Law Foundation: $73k → 13%Columbia University: $24k → 17%Congression Prog Caucus Ctr: $24k → 14%Mobility International USA: $10k → 15%CUNY Law Foundation: $46k → 13%WOMEN IN MIGRATION NETWORK: $5k → 17%Mobility International USA: $10k → 15%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Grants abroad, by region: $4.5M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 8 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Middle East and North Africa$1.3M · 29% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: RELIEF

Sub-Saharan Africa$939k · 21% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: RELIEF

South Asia$931k · 21% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: RELIEF

Central America and the Caribbean$522k · 12% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: RELIEF

South America$472k · 11% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: RELIEF

North America (Canada and Mexico)$124k · 3% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: RELIEF

East Asia and the Pacific$113k · 3% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: RELIEF

Russia and Neighboring States$53k · 1% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: RELIEF

How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$304k · 3 repeat orgs$83k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +36% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
5

Total granted

$304k
$63k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
0%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 41% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’23’24’25
InternationalPublic BenefitCivil RightsEducationHealthOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • TC
    THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK SCHOOL OF LAW FOUNDATION INC
    3× · 2018–2023 · $219k · revenue +530%
  • CP
    CONGRESSIONAL PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS CENTER
    2× · 2019–2020 · $51k · revenue +36%
  • MI
    MOBILITY INTERNATIONAL USA
    3× · 2018–2025 · $34k · revenue -14%

Funded once

  • CENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC
    one grant, 2018 · $21k · revenue +11%
  • THE PRAXIS PROJECT INC
    one grant, 2021 · $20k · revenue -15%
  • PT
    Progress Texas Institute
    one grant, 2021 · $9k · revenue -73%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Center for International Policy Inc

The center for international policy is a woman-led, progressive, independent nonprofit center for research, education, and advocacy working to advance a more peaceful, just, and sustainable u.s. approach to foreign policy. through…

International
2
Partnership for Policy Integrity

Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.

Environment
3
Climate Rights International

CRI is an international climate and human rights monitoring and advocacy organization dedicated to preventing climate change and human rights abuses.

Environment
4
Guernica Centre for InternationalJustice

The Guernica Centre for International Justice represents the interests of victims in national and international legal proceedings, putting in place transnational accountability strategies that seek to maximize the protection of victims'…

International
5
Polis Institute Inc

To champion human dignity by designing the solutions to the social problems that infringe upon it.

Religion
6
Progressive Change Institute

The progressive change institute develops and promotes public policy, fosters bottom-up democracy, and educates the public. this includes working to impact the mainstream political discourse and protect democracy.

Public Benefit
7
International Center for Research On Women

The international center for research for women (icrw) is a global research institute, with a mission to advance rights and opportunities for women, girls, and structurally excluded populations with actionable evidence and solutions.

International
8
Partnership for Participatory International Policy

Partnership for Participatory International Policy coordinates opportunities for elected officials, staff and community leaders to learn from people impacted by US foreign policies and practices. We do this by organizing delegations to…

Civil Rights
9
Networks of Change

Networks of Change strengthens the skills of human rights advocates and civil society organizations to advance their capacity to achieve positive social change using traditional social and new media and outreach strategies to inform and…

International
10
Asociacion Interamericana Para La Defensa Del Ambiente

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.

Crime & Legal
11
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
12
Center for Strategic and International Studies

The center for strategic and international studies (csis) is a bipartisan, nonprofit policy research organization dedicated to advancing practical ideas to address the world's greatest challenges.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Praxis Project Inc; the most unlike its peers is New Eyes for the Needy Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

12 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
7/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK SCHOOL OF LAW FOUNDATION INC: $218,900 · EducationTHE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK SCHOOL OF LAW FOUNDATION INCTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $97,705 · EducationTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORKCONGRESSIONAL PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS CENTER: $51,000 · Public BenefitCONGRESSIONAL PR…CENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC: $20,800 · Public BenefitCENTER FOR POPUL…MOBILITY INTERNATIONAL USA: $33,758 · InternationalMOBILITY INTER…MIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE: $20,000 · InternationalMIDDLE EAST CH…GRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC: $8,500 · InternationalGRASSROOTS INT…THE PRAXIS PROJECT INC: $20,000 · HealthProgress Texas Institute: $8,500 · Civil RightsWOMEN IN MIGRATION NETWORK INC: $5,000 · Civil Rights
Education$316,605Public Benefit$71,800International$62,258Health$20,000Civil Rights$13,500

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK SCHOOL OF LAW FOUNDATION INC: $218,900 over 3y, 3.9% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $97,705 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCONGRESSIONAL PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS CENTER: $51,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetMOBILITY INTERNATIONAL USA: $33,758 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetCENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC: $20,800 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE PRAXIS PROJECT INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetProgress Texas Institute: $8,500 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetGRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC: $8,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWOMEN IN MIGRATION NETWORK INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Ford FoundationNY13.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ford Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Madre Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Madre Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 33%
  • Mobility International Usa: 33% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Madre Inc?

Find your warmest path to Madre Inc 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 10 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Madre’s filings →

More from the funding graph