How much did MARY REYNOLDS BABCOCK FOUNDATION grant in FY2024?

Civil Rights$18MPublic Benefit$14MHuman Services$7.4MCommunity Improvement$6.0MEducation$5.5MCrime & Legal$4.2MPhilanthropy$2.5MHousing & Shelter$2.1MEnvironment$2.0MOther$24M

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2020

covid responsecredit unionupliftopeartingbancorphope enterpriseenterprise corporation

2021

rapid responsehurricane idaresponse safetysafety securitysoutheastmountainfunders

2022

election protectionemergency responsecollaborativepropertyeconomic policycongress latinoatlanta

2023

table behalfracialpiecerestorehercivic engagementengagement tablecorporation

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 76 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

$10k–50k25 grants · $585k
$50k–250k20 grants · $3.2M
$250k+31 grants · $14M

$205,000

Median grant

States reached

$182M

Total assets

Largest grants

PROGEORGIA STATE TABLE INC$1,250,000
POWER COALITION FOR EQUITY AND JUSTICE$1,080,000
ALABAMA FORWARD$850,000
MISSISSIPPI ENGAGED$805,000
ASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE$700,000
STATE VOICES$675,000
CENTER ON BUDGET AND POLICY PRIORTITIES$637,500
STATE LEADERSHIP PROJECT$575,000
NORTH CAROLINA ASIAN AMERICANS TOGETHER$405,000
GEORGIA BUDGET AND POLICY INSTITUTE INC$400,000
MISSISSIPPI VOTES$400,000
WEST VIRGINIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT HUB INC$350,000
ALABAMA ARISE$350,000
STEP UP LOUISIANA$330,000
CIVIC TN$325,000

02The need

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 (FY20–24, $7.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12% — the area typically sits at 11%. 52% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

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 line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$63M · 84 repeat orgs$23M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +189% since the first grant, against +84% for the ones you funded once.

84 repeat relationships — 44 still active in FY2024, 40 since wound down; 32 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

111

Total granted

$63M

$18M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+189%

+84%

Still filing today

81%

46%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4.6M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitCivil RightsEducationPhilanthropyOther

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

PS
PROGEORGIA STATE TABLE INC
4× · 2020–2024 · $3.7M · revenue +116%
SV
STATE VOICES
3× · 2020–2024 · $3.7M · revenue +57%
AA
ASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE ATLANTA
4× · 2020–2024 · $2.5M · revenue +560%

Funded once

BLUEPRINT NORTH CAROLINAgraduated
one grant, 2020 · $1.9M · revenue +156%
SL
STATE LEADERSHIP PROJECT ON BEHALF OF SOUTHERN WORKING GROUP
one grant, 2022 · $1.0M
NF
NEIGHBORHOOD FUNDERS GROUP ON BEHALF OF SOUTHERN WORKERS OPPORTUNITY FUND
one grant, 2021 · $1.0M

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.

Southern Bancorp Capital Partners

Creating economic opportunities in distressed rural communities.

—

South Carolina Council On

Providing actionable research, supporting industry clusters, and furthering education and workforce development.

Community Improvement

New North Carolina Project Action First

The new north carolina project's mission is to make politics represent the needs of north carolinians by investing in communities of color, expanding the engaged electorate and creating #lifelongvoters.

Civil Rights

American Civil Liberties Union

At the aclu of south carolina, we envision a south carolina where "we the people" means all of us. we defend and advance the civil rights and civil liberties of all south carolinians through lobbying and political engagement.

—

Fund for Southern Communities Inc

The Fund for Southern Communities is a public foundation that supports and unites organizations and donors working to create just and sustainable communities that are free of oppression and that embrace and celebrate all people.

Philanthropy

American Civil Liberties Union

At the aclu of south carolina foundation, we envision a south carolina where "we the people" means all of us. we defend and advance the civil rights and civil liberties of all south carolinians through litigation, education, and advocacy.

Civil Rights

Forward Justice Action Network

Forward Justice Action Network is a nonprofit with the purpose to engage in educati onal and advocacy activities to promote political and grassroots support for publi c policies that advance racial social and economic justice in North…

Human Services

Alabama Values

Alabama values is a communications hub seeking to amplify progressive voices and policies in alabama. our goal is to provide messenging and communications leadership and infrastructure to organizations and coalitions to build community…

Arts & Culture

Atlanta Committee for Progress Inc

ACP is a group committed to identifying and providing leadership on selected issues important to driving the economic development of the city of Atlanta and for which the ACP's active involvement will make a major difference. The ACP has a…

—

Community Action Coalition for South

To transform our communities by fostering conditions where everyone can achieve social and economic security.

—

Urban League of Central Carolinas Inc

To advocate for and equip african americans and all underserved communities with the tools to achieve social and economic equality.

—

Appalachian Community Capital

To increase small business lending by providing appalachian member institutions that serve underserved people and communities with new sources of capital.

Philanthropy

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Southern Vision Alliance and the most unlike its peers is New Venture Fund. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 21 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) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/135

the rest of the field

11%

206,164/1,819,430

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.

05the grantee network

135 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

134/135

Grantees still filing

118/135

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$30,634,258Civil Rights$17,663,500Public Benefit$13,803,500Human Services$7,429,550Community Improvement$6,030,004Education$5,455,000Crime & Legal$4,160,000

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.

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.

Amalgamated Charitable Foundation IncDC64.7× affinity43 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · New Venture Fund · NEO Philanthropy Inc · Marguerite Casey Foundation · Tides Foundation · WK Kellogg Foundation · The Educational Foundation of America · Annie E Casey Foundation Inc · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · Windward Fund · Blueprint North Carolina · The Ford 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 organisation MARY REYNOLDS BABCOCK 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

0get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: TOGETHER LOUISIANA.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~9 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 5 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

5 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 10.5× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 852994623 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on TOGETHER LOUISIANA, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 9 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 74% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Mary Reynolds Babcock Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Mary Reynolds Babcock Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

MARY REYNOLDS BABCOCK FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

135 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Mary Reynolds Babcock Foundation?

More from the funding graph

MARY REYNOLDS BABCOCK FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

135 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Mary Reynolds Babcock Foundation?

More from the funding graph