Skip to content
Me Too International Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Me Too International Inc

Survivors to resource, offering community organizing resources, pursuing a me too policy platform, and working with researchers to add to the field and chart our way forwrd.

$80k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Crime & Legal$175kCivil Rights$37kEducation$27kHuman Services$26kArts & Culture$12kHealth$10kEmployment$10k
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $50,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $80,174 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $30,174 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.
$25,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATIONAL WOMENS LAW CENTER$25,000
JUSTICE FOR MIGRANT WOMEN$25,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY23–23, $26k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 62% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%ESPERANZA UNITED: $10k → 14%SWOP BEHIND BARS INC: $6k → 13%MONSOON ASIANS & PACIFIC ISLANDERS IN SOLIDARITY: $10k → 10%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.

Which US states its grants reach

MN
NY
IA
OH
CT
RI
CA
NC
DC
AL
GA
FL
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.
03Its 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
Stichting Womens Initiatives for Gender Justice

Ending impunity for conflict related sexual violence

International
2
Women's Law Project

Women's law project creates a more just and equitable society by advancing the rights and status of all women throughout their lives. to this end, we engage in high-impact litigation, advocacy, and education. the core values of women's law…

Civil Rights
3
Direct Action for Women Now World-Wide Inc Formerly Indias Daughters Inc
Philanthropy
4
Equal Justice Center

The Equal Justice Center is a non-profit law firm and employment justice organization which empowers low-income families, workers, and communities to achieve fair treatment in the workplace, in the justice system, and in our shared society…

Civil Rights
5
Coalition Ending Gender-Based Violence

To end gender-based violence and promote equitable relationships through collective action for social change.

Crime & Legal
6
Washington Office On Latin America

To advance human rights and social justice in the americas.

International
7
Women's Refugee Commission Inc

To improve the lives and protect the rights of women, children and youth displaced by conflict and crisis. the women's refugee commission envisions a world in which refugees are safe, healthy and reliant and seeks to drive change in…

Human Services
8
The International Institute On Race Equality and Human Rights

The international institute on race, equality and human rights contributes to the promotion and defense of human rights, through training, technical assistance, advocacy, and strategic litigation conducted at the regional and international…

International
9
End Violence Against Women International (Evawi)

End violence against women international (evawi) inspires and educates those who respond to gender-based violence, equipping them with the knowledge and tools they need to support victims and hold perpetrators accountable. we promote…

Human Services
10
Equality Now Inc

To achieve legal and systematic change that addresses violence and discrimination against women and girls around the world.

International
11
Sexual Violence Law Center

Sexual Violence Law Center (SVLC) is a nonprofit law firm that protects the safety, privacy, and civil rights of survivors of sexual and gender-based violence in Washington through holistic and trauma-informed practices rooted in race and…

Human Services
12
Latinas Usa
Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Alliance to End Sexual Violence; the most unlike its peers is Swop Behind Bars 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

17 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. 17 of the 19 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

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

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
10/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NATIONAL WOMEN'S LAW CENTER: $59,363 · OtherNATIONAL WOMEN'S LAW CENTERTIME'S UP FOUNDATION: $50,000 · OtherTIME'S UP FOUNDATIONEQUAL RIGHTS ADVOCATES: $10,000 · OtherEQUAL RIGHTS ADVOCATESBOARD OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA: $10,000 · OtherBOARD OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMARESTAURANT OPPORTUNITIES CENTERS UNITED INC: $10,000 · OtherRESTAURANT OPPORTUNITIES CENTERS UNITED INCEDUCATEUS: $6,000 · OtherJUSTICE FOR MIGRANT WOMEN: $35,000 · Crime & LegalJUSTICE FOR MIGRANT WOMENSafeBae Org Inc: $12,000 · Crime & LegalSafeBae Org IncNATIONAL ALLIANCE TO END SEXUAL VIOLENCE: $12,000 · Crime & LegalNATIONAL ALLIANCE TO END SE…COALITION TO ABOLISH SLAVERY & TRAFFICKING: $7,000 · Crime & LegalCOALITION TO ABOLISH SLAVER…GIRLS FOR GENDER EQUITY INC: $6,000 · Crime & LegalGIRLS FOR GENDER EQUITY INCMONSOON ASIANS & PACIFIC ISLANDERS IN SOLIDARITY: $10,000 · Human ServicesMONSOON A…ESPERANZA UNITED: $10,000 · Human ServicesESPERANZA…SWOP BEHIND BARS INC: $6,000 · Human ServicesSWOP BEHI…Spelman College: $10,000 · EducationSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $7,000 · EducationUltraViolet Education Fund: $15,000 · Civil RightsFRACTURED ATLAS INC: $12,000 · Arts & CultureNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF SISTERS OF COLOR ENDING SEXUAL ASSAULT: $10,000 · Health
Other$145,363Crime & Legal$72,000Human Services$26,000Education$17,000Civil Rights$15,000Arts & Culture$12,000Health$10,000

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 budgetNATIONAL WOMEN'S LAW CENTER: $59,363 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTIME'S UP FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 1y, 34% of budgetJUSTICE FOR MIGRANT WOMEN: $35,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetUltraViolet Education Fund: $15,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetFRACTURED ATLAS INC: $12,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSafeBae Org Inc: $12,000 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetNATIONAL ALLIANCE TO END SEXUAL VIOLENCE: $12,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetMONSOON ASIANS & PACIFIC ISLANDERS IN SOLIDARITY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF SISTERS OF COLOR ENDING SEXUAL ASSAULT: $10,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetEQUAL RIGHTS ADVOCATES: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetESPERANZA UNITED: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSpelman College: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRESTAURANT OPPORTUNITIES CENTERS UNITED INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCOALITION TO ABOLISH SLAVERY & TRAFFICKING: $7,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGIRLS FOR GENDER EQUITY INC: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSWOP BEHIND BARS INC: $6,000 over 1y, 0.5% 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.

Amalgamated Charitabl…Tides FoundationThe Ford FoundationMs Foundation for Wom…Novo FoundationRockefeller Philanthr…The San Francisco Fou…National Philanthropi…Morgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
Amalgamated Charitable Foundation IncDC16.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Tides Foundation · The Ford Foundation · Ms Foundation for Women Inc · Novo Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · The San Francisco Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Me Too International Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Me Too International Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 100%
  • National Organization of Sisters of Color Ending Sexual Assault: 100% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Me Too International Inc?

Find your warmest path to Me Too International 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 19 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 Me Too International’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home