· Public charity
Native American Rights Fund Inc
The native american rights fund holds governments accountable.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 2 grants below total $142,138 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,103,168 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $961,030 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BERING SEA ELDERS GROUP VIA BERING SEA FISHERMAN A | $89,042 |
| INDIGENOUS CEREMONIAL AND RELIGIOUS SERVICES ORGAN | $53,096 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 76% of your 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.
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 +71% since the first grant, against +32% for the ones you funded once.
24 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2023, 24 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).
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 FY2023, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $142k 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
- DPDNA PEOPLES LEGAL SERVICES INC3× · 2017–2019 · $307k · revenue +163%
California Indian Legal Services Inc3× · 2017–2019 · $225k · revenue +68%- DPDAKOTA PLAINS LEGAL SERVICES3× · 2017–2019 · $191k · revenue +51%
Funded once
- BSBERING SEA FISHERMENS ASSOCIATIONone grant, 2023 · $89k · revenue +18%
- IPINDIGENOUS PEYOTE CONSERVATION INITATIVEgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $53k · revenue +32%
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.
Legal aid of wyoming is a statewide non-profit organization providing high quality civil legal services to eligible people to facilitate and encourage a just legal system.
Provide respectful high quality legal advice, counsel, brief services and referral to low-income New Mexicans and help remove barriers to the civil justice system.
The primary purpose of legal aid services of oregon shall be to achieve justice for the low-income communities of oregon by providing a full range of the highest quality civil legal services.
To be a public law firm that knows, as well as understands, the problems of even the poorest in our communities and addresses these problems through education, and with creative legal advocacy of the highest distinction. LSNM will be seen…
Legal aid of manasota provides legal services at no or low cost to those in need by partnering with local lawyers.
Our mission is to provide civil legal service to low-income clients. our legal services provide basic protection for our clients by enforcing the law when their rights have been violated, promote the self-sufficiency of individuals…
Standing with our neighbors, Lakeshore Legal Aid fights poverty and injustice through advocacy and by providing meaningful and dignified access to the legal system.
People's Legal Aid is a non-profit legal organization providing free civil legal education, assistance and representation to any Utahn facing eviction and debt collections lawsuits.
Texas Legal Services Center is a nonprofit legal aid organization whose mission is to serve the undeserved by making civil justice accessible to every Texan--no matter their ability to earn. We're a coalition of attorneys, paralegals, pro…
Providing civil legal services to low income individuals in 33 counties in eastern south dakota.
Northwestern legal services assists low income individuals and families by guiding them through the legal system using advocacy and education to obtain justice with the goal of improving their quality of life and strengthening our…
Linn County Advocate, Inc., provides quality legal representation for indigent clients in criminal and juvenile cases at the state court level in Linn, Johnson, Benton, and Jones Counties in the state of Iowa.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nevada Legal Services Inc and the most unlike its peers is Bering Sea Fishermens Association. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 51 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 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
23 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. 23 of the 26 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 DNA PEOPLES LEGAL SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds California Indian Legal Services Inc ↗
- Who funds DAKOTA PLAINS LEGAL SERVICES ↗
- Who funds OKLAHOMA INDIAN LEGAL SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds Michigan Indian Legal Services ↗
- Who funds WISCONSIN JUDICARE INC ↗
- Who funds IDAHO LEGAL AID SERVICES INC IDAHO LEGAL AID SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds NEW MEXICO LEGAL AID INC ↗
- Who funds TEXAS RIOGRANDE LEGAL AID INC ↗
- Who funds UTAH LEGAL SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds ANISHINABE LEGAL SERVICES ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN ARIZONA LEGAL AID INC ↗
- Who funds MONTANA LEGAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds NEVADA LEGAL SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds BERING SEA FISHERMENS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds PINE TREE LEGAL ASSISTANCE INC ↗
- Who funds LEGAL SERVICES OF NORTH DAKOTA ↗
- Who funds INDIGENOUS PEYOTE CONSERVATION INITATIVE ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID OF NEBRASKA ↗
- Who funds Northwest Justice Project ↗
- Who funds Alaska Legal Services Corporation ↗
- Who funds COLORADO LEGAL SERVICES ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID OF NORTH CAROLINA 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: Legal Services Corporation · Montana Legal Services Association · Equal Justice Works · American College of Bankruptcy Foundation · The Skadden Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Native American Rights Fund Inc 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.
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.