Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Private foundation

Myles D & J Faye Sampson Family Foundationc/O Intentional Philanthrophy

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.

$1.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
66
Grants FY2025still arriving
12
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
0172% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2019–2025.

Health$1.7MFood & Nutrition$1.3MEducation$990kEnvironment$720kHuman Services$549kCommunity Improvement$548kCrime & Legal$365kYouth Development$330kPhilanthropy$289kOther$3.3M
02FY2025 · 66 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k23 grants · $73k
  • $10k–50k33 grants · $811k
  • $50k–250k10 grants · $680k
$25,000
Median grant
12
States reached
$33M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GROW PITTSBURGH$100,000
GROW PITTSBURGH$85,000
THE MIDWIFE CENTER FOR BIRTH & WOMEN'S HEALTH$75,000
COMMUNITY KITCHEN PITTSBURGH$75,000
GIVE BACK YOGA FOUNDATION$65,000
CENTER FOR COALFIELD JUSTICE$60,000
DOCUMENTING HOPE$60,000
THE CENTER FOR MIND BODY MEDICINE$60,000
UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA FOUNDATION FOR THE BENEFIT OF AZCIM$50,000
FAIR SHAKE ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL SERVICES$50,000
FAIR SHAKE ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL SERVICES$40,000
DOCUMENTING HOPE$35,000
PITTSBURGH STRUGGLING STUDENT ASSOCIATION$30,000
SHUNPIKE$30,000
THE COMPASS CENTER FOUNDATION$30,000
02The need
03

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 (FY19–25, $504k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 96% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%MAMATOTO VILLAGE INC: $3k → 14%SISTERSONG WOMEN OF COLOR REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE COLLECTIVE: $5k → 13%THE FOUNDATION FOR THE HORSE: $10k → 15%GIVE TO GIVE FOUNDATION: $5k → 17%MAMATOTO VILLAGE INC: $3k → 14%THE FOUNDATION FOR THE HORSE: $5k → 15%MAMATOTO VILLAGE INC: $3k → 14%GIVE TO GIVE FOUNDATION: $5k → 17%PIZZA KLATCH: $5k → 9%COMMUNITY YOUTH SERVICES: $10k → 9%COMMUNITY YOUTH SERVICES: $4k → 9%YMCA OF GREATER PITTSBURGH: $45k → 11%YMCA OF GREATER PITTSBURGH: $45k → 11%YMCA OF GREATER PITTSBURGH: $45k → 11%YMCA OF GREATER PITTSBURGH: $45k → 11%YMCA OF GREATER PITTSBURGH: $45k → 11%YMCA OF GREATER PITTSBURGH: $45k → 11%YMCA OF GREATER PITTSBURGH: $25k → 11%NEW SUN RISING: $15k → 11%NEW SUN RISING: $1k → 11%NEW SUN RISING: $1k → 11%PITTSBURGH GREEN INNOVATORS: $70k → 11%PITTSBURGH GREEN INNOVATORS: $30k → 11%PITTSBURGH GREEN INNOVATORS: $20k → 11%PITTSBURGH GREEN INNOVATORS: $10k → 11%PITTSBURGH GREEN INNOVATORS: $5k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 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

WA
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
WY
SD
OH
PA
NJ
CT
CA
UT
CO
NE
KY
VA
MD
AZ
TN
NC
SC
DC
GA
TX
FL

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.

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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$8.8M · 67 repeat orgs$1.0M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +24% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.

67 repeat relationships — 33 still active in FY2025, 34 since wound down; 20 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

67
75

Total granted

$8.8M
$812k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+24%
+12%

Still filing today

67%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $200k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesEducationFood & NutritionEnvironmentArts & CultureAnimalsOther

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

  • GP
    GROW PITTSBURGH
    7× · 2019–2025 · $655k · revenue +133%
  • TM
    THE MIDWIFE CENTER FOR BIRTH AND WOMEN'S HEALTH
    7× · 2019–2025 · $550k · revenue +3%
  • CK
    COMMUNITY KITCHEN PITTSBURGH
    7× · 2019–2025 · $500k · revenue +24%

Funded once

  • HT
    HARVARD TH CHAN SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH DBA PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVA
    one grant, 2020 · $100k
  • DE
    DR EISENBERG AT THE WINDWARD FUND
    one grant, 2019 · $100k
  • SV
    SANKOFA VILLAGE COMMUNITY GARDEN
    one grant, 2022 · $83k

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.

1
Sustainable Pittsburgh

Provide information to decision maker in the pittsburgh region to promote economic prosperity, social equity, and environmental quality for sustainable solutions for communities and businesses.

Environment
2
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
3
Animal Outlook Inc

Animal outlook is a national animal protection organization working to end the abuse of farmed animals using a variety of strategies, including investigations, legal advocacy, corporate and food system reform, and vegan outreach.

Animals
4
Zoological Society of Pittsburgh

The zoological society of pittsburgh is dedicated to being a leader in, and significant contributor to, the conservation of endangered and threatened species. the society provides an enjoyable family experience that fosters understanding,…

Animals
5
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
6
Eden Peopleplanet

To offer the dignity of fair employment to people living in impoverished communities, who become transformational agents of global forest restoration.

International
7
Friends of the Earth

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…

Environment
8
Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy

We improve quality of life by enhancing and stewarding pittsburgh's parks in partnership with the community.

Recreation & Sports
9
Better Future Project Inc

Better future project works to build a powerful grassroots movement to address the climate crisis and advance a rapid and responsible transition beyond fossil fuels. we educate the public about climate change, empower new leaders, and help…

Environment
10
Toxic-Free Future F/K/a Washington Toxics Coalition

As a national leader in environmental health research and advocacy, toxic- free future uses the power of science, education, and activism, to drive strong laws and corporate responsibility that protect the health of all people and the…

Environment
11
Wedontwaste Inc

We Dont Waste increases food access and protects the planet by rescuing and repurposing food, while educating and advocating to increase food security and decrease food waste.

Food & Nutrition
12
Pittsburgh Entertainment Project

To create a vibrant, responsible, and sustainable film and digital media sector in southwestern pennsylvania.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc and the most unlike its peers is Adopt a Boxer Rescue. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyChristian Missionary Organi…Local Food System Organizat…Community College Foundatio…Community FoundationsAffordable Housing Developm…Domestic Violence ServicesPregnancy Support ServicesAnimal Rescue and ShelterEquine Therapy ProgramsYouth Sports ProgramsEnvironmental Conservation …Lgbtq+ Community SupportLocal History MuseumsYouth Development ServicesIndependent K-12 SchoolsFood Banks and PantriesCommunity Arts CentersCommunity FoundationsImmigrant Worker SupportCancer Support Services
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 22 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number18%3%<5yr13%12%5–10yr19%29%10–20yr17%23%20–35yr15%18%35–55yr17%14%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value18%1%<5yr13%5%5–10yr19%41%10–20yr17%30%20–35yr15%12%35–55yr17%11%55yr+

The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 9% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
4%5/136
the rest of the field
9%
7,127/78,026

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.

04the grantee network

117 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. 117 of the 166 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
33
Early backer (in before they grew)
111/117
Grantees still filing
78/117
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

UPMC CANCERCENTER — $335,000 · OtherUPMC CANCERCENTERUNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA FOUNDATION FOR THE BENEFIT OF AZ CENTER FOR INTEGRATI — $275,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA FOUNDATION FOR THE BENEFI…GIVE BACK YOGA FOUNDATION EAT BREATHE THRIVE — $205,000 · OtherPITTSBURGH STRUGGLING STUDENTS ASSOCIATION — $200,000 · OtherFAIR SHAKE ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL SERVICES — $310,000 · OtherFAIR SHAKE ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL SERVICESReal Food for Kids — $275,000 · OtherReal Food for KidsCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER JOHNSTOWN — $251,158 · OtherCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER JOHNSTOWN+101 more — $2,407,000 · Other+101 moreTHE MIDWIFE CENTER FOR BIRTH AND WOMEN'S HEALTH — $550,000 · HealthTHE MIDWIFE CENTER…THE CENTER FOR MIND-BODY MEDICINE — $470,000 · HealthTHE CENTER FOR MIN…COLORECTAL CANCER ALLIANCE — $400,000 · HealthCOLORECTAL CANCER …FAMILY HOUSE INC — $207,000 · HealthFAMILY HOUSE INC+3 more — $60,500 · HealthGROW PITTSBURGH — $655,000 · Food & NutritionGROW PITTSBURG…COMMUNITY KITCHEN PITTSBURGH — $500,000 · Food & NutritionCOMMUNITY KITC…Garfield Community Farm Inc — $76,000 · Food & NutritionGarfield Commu…PROJECT BIOME INC — $50,000 · Food & Nutrition+6 more — $47,500 · Food & NutritionDocumenting Hope Inc — $365,500 · EducationDocumenting…GIVE BACK YOGA FOUNDATION — $295,000 · EducationGIVE BACK Y…University of Arizona Foundation — $150,000 · EducationUniversity …Bucknell University — $80,000 · EducationBucknell Un…THE LANGLEY SCHOOL INC — $35,000 · Education+8 more — $64,500 · Education+8 moreCENTER FOR COALFIELD JUSTICE — $385,000 · EnvironmentSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION — $160,000 · EnvironmentFRACTRACKER ALLIANCE — $95,000 · EnvironmentWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY — $61,000 · Environment+6 more — $18,500 · EnvironmentYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF GREATER PITTSBURGH — $295,000 · Human ServicesPITTSBURGH GREEN INNOVATORS INC — $135,000 · Human ServicesDOMESTIC ABUSE WOMEN'S NETWORK — $25,000 · Human Services+10 more — $94,000 · Human ServicesHILL DISTRICT CONSENSUS GROUP — $258,699 · Community ImprovementOUT OF THE END INC — $128,500 · Community ImprovementBLOOMFIELD-GARFIELD CORPORATION — $101,000 · Community ImprovementPITTSBURGH CARES — $55,000 · Community Improvement+1 more — $5,000 · Community Improvement
Other$4,258,158Health$1,687,500Food & Nutrition$1,328,500Education$990,000Environment$719,500Human Services$549,000Community Improvement$548,199

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetGROW PITTSBURGH — $655,000 over 7y, 5.8% of budgetTHE MIDWIFE CENTER FOR BIRTH AND WOMEN'S HEALTH — $550,000 over 7y, 3.5% of budgetCOMMUNITY KITCHEN PITTSBURGH — $500,000 over 7y, 2.7% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR MIND-BODY MEDICINE — $470,000 over 7y, 1.8% of budgetCOLORECTAL CANCER ALLIANCE — $400,000 over 5y, 1.2% of budgetCENTER FOR COALFIELD JUSTICE — $385,000 over 7y, 6.7% of budgetDocumenting Hope Inc — $365,500 over 5y, 14% of budgetFAIR SHAKE ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL SERVICES — $310,000 over 7y, 4.9% of budgetYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF GREATER PITTSBURGH — $295,000 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetGIVE BACK YOGA FOUNDATION — $295,000 over 4y, 22% of budgetReal Food for Kids — $275,000 over 5y, 23% of budgetHILL DISTRICT CONSENSUS GROUP — $258,699 over 5y, 25% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER JOHNSTOWN — $251,158 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetFAMILY HOUSE INC — $207,000 over 7y, 1.8% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION — $160,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetUniversity of Arizona Foundation — $150,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPITTSBURGH GREEN INNOVATORS INC — $135,000 over 3y, 24% of budgetAMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL — $135,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetOUT OF THE END INC — $128,500 over 4y, 41% of budgetBLOOMFIELD-GARFIELD CORPORATION — $101,000 over 4y, 1.5% of budgetDOG TAG INC — $100,000 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetFRACTRACKER ALLIANCE — $95,000 over 4y, 3.5% of budgetBucknell University — $80,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetGarfield Community Farm Inc — $76,000 over 3y, 11% of budgetWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY — $61,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetPITTSBURGH CARES — $55,000 over 3y, 4.1% of budgetTURNING POINTE SURVIVOR ADVOCACY CENTER — $55,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetPITTSBURGH PUBLIC THEATER CORPORATION — $55,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetA PLACE TO BE — $55,000 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetPROJECT BIOME INC — $50,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetALLIES FOR HEALTH WELLBEING — $40,500 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetTHE LANGLEY SCHOOL INC — $35,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetWHYHUNGER INC — $30,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetHIGH DESERT TEST SITES — $30,000 over 1y, 6.7% of budgetMoms Across America — $27,000 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetTHE PITTSBURGH CONTINGENCY INC — $26,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC — $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNORTHSIDE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY — $25,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetDOMESTIC ABUSE WOMEN'S NETWORK — $25,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetTHE FRED ROGERS COMPANY — $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE WESTON A PRICE FOUNDATION — $20,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetNEW SUN RISING — $17,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE FOUNDATION FOR THE HORSE FKA THE AAEP FOUNDATION INC — $15,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetINTERFAITH WORKS — $15,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetCOMMUNITY YOUTH SERVICES — $13,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF ANIMALS INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP — $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWashington Trust For Historic Preservation — $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budget
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 GROW PITTSBURGH ↗
  • Who funds THE MIDWIFE CENTER FOR BIRTH AND WOMEN'S HEALTH ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY KITCHEN PITTSBURGH ↗
  • Who funds THE CENTER FOR MIND-BODY MEDICINE ↗
  • Who funds COLORECTAL CANCER ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR COALFIELD JUSTICE ↗
  • Who funds Documenting Hope Inc ↗
  • Who funds FAIR SHAKE ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF GREATER PITTSBURGH ↗
  • Who funds GIVE BACK YOGA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Real Food for Kids ↗
  • Who funds HILL DISTRICT CONSENSUS GROUP ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER JOHNSTOWN ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY HOUSE INC ↗
  • Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds University of Arizona Foundation ↗
  • Who funds PITTSBURGH GREEN INNOVATORS INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds OUT OF THE END INC ↗
  • Who funds MWANAKUCHE FARM ↗
  • Who funds BLOOMFIELD-GARFIELD CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds DOG TAG INC ↗
  • Who funds FRACTRACKER ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds Bucknell University ↗
  • Who funds Garfield Community Farm Inc ↗
  • Who funds WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds PITTSBURGH CARES ↗

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.

The Heinz EndowmentsThe Pittsburgh Founda…Opportunity FoundationHillman Family Founda…The Grable FoundationRichard King Mellon F…Poise FoundationThe Buhl FoundationThe Community Foundat…Neighborhood Allies I…McAuley MinistriesMcCune Foundation Pnc…
The Heinz EndowmentsPA47.6× affinity23 shared granteesties to 10 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Heinz Endowments · The Pittsburgh Foundation · Opportunity Foundation · Hillman Family Foundations · The Grable Foundation · Richard King Mellon Foundation · Poise Foundation · The Buhl Foundation · The Community Foundation of South Puget Sound · Neighborhood Allies Inc · McAuley Ministries · McCune Foundation Pnc Bank Na

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 Myles D & J Faye Sampson Family Foundationc/O Intentional Philanthrophy 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
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 70%3%13%28%50%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 43%
  • Postpartum Support International — 43% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
7get no government money at all
30report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 166 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

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

Source object · view filing

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines