· Private foundation
Novo Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k3 grants · $18k
- $10k–50k42 grants · $1.1M
- $50k–250k291 grants · $36M
- $250k+172 grants · $177M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WOMEN BUILDING UP INC | $20,000,000 |
| TIDES FOUNDATION | $19,337,450 |
| ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS | $14,000,000 |
| TIDES CENTER | $10,000,000 |
| COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONS OF THE HUDSON VALLEY | $8,261,670 |
| RUPCO INC | $5,000,000 |
| ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS | $4,500,000 |
| ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS | $3,350,000 |
| TIDES FOUNDATION | $3,000,000 |
| ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS | $2,750,000 |
| THE INSTITUTE FOR FAMILY HEALTH | $2,651,074 |
| SEVENTH GENERATION FUND FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES INC | $2,275,000 |
| COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONS OF THE HUDSON VALLEY | $2,154,498 |
| TIDES FOUNDATION | $2,000,000 |
| TIDES FOUNDATION | $2,000,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY18–24, $42.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 95% of those 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 6% of Novo Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 64% of the giving stays in NY; read by stated purpose it is 57% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +40% since the first grant, against +22% for the ones you funded once.
633 repeat relationships — 262 still active in FY2024, 371 since wound down; 55 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $29M 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
MADRE INC7× · 2018–2024 · $14M · revenue +1% · 94% of their budget- TLThe Land Institute7× · 2018–2024 · $11M · revenue +140% · 36% of their budget
National Domestic Workers Alliance Inc5× · 2018–2022 · $9.5M · revenue +206%
Funded once
- KIKASHIF INCUBATOR INCone grant, 2023 · $1.9M · revenue -17% · 87% of their budget
CENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INCone grant, 2018 · $1.3M · revenue +11%- MEMID-HUDSON ENERGY TRANSITION INCone grant, 2022 · $1.3M · revenue +14% · 83% of their budget
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.
To lead and coordinate the global initiative to address and prevent criminalization, violence, and impunity against indigenous peoples towards strengthening their collectives, solidarity, and actions.
Women donors network advances a just, equitable, and sustainable world through the power of philanthropy, women's leadership, and collective and individual action.
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…
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…
Our mission as a global alliance is to provide strategies, research, and resources that support the critical agency and influence of women's foundations and gender justice funders in the movement for equality, justice, and power for all.
Nuru is a global collective that enables inclusive and sustainable prosperity by identifying communities at the stability tipping point, strengthening rural livelihoods and market systems, and fostering stabilizing connections that repair…
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.
To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with Indigenous communities in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability, and the preservation of the Amazon Basin's…
New Roots Institute is a nonprofit empowering the next generation with knowledge and training to end factory farming.
IWWG empowers women writers with workshops events and community gatherings to encourage writing speaking and publishing
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Girl Be Heard Institute and the most unlike its peers is Re-Entry Rocks Inc. 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.
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 23 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 10% 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.
763 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. 763 of the 872 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONS OF THE HUDSON VALLEY INC ↗
- Who funds TIDES CENTER ↗
- Who funds WOMEN BUILDING UP INC ↗
- Who funds MADRE INC ↗
- Who funds MOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER ↗
- Who funds RSF SOCIAL FINANCE INC ↗
- Who funds The Land Institute ↗
- Who funds ROCKEFELLER FAMILY FUND INC ↗
- Who funds National Domestic Workers Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds SEVENTH GENERATION FUND FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES INC ↗
- Who funds THOUSAND CURRENTS ↗
- Who funds Equality Now Inc ↗
- Who funds MS FOUNDATION FOR WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds EMPOWER-THE EMERGING MARKETS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds RUPCO INC ↗
- Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
- Who funds OMEGA INSTITUTE FOR HOLISTIC STUDIES INC ↗
- Who funds THE BLACK BELT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds TURNAROUND FOR CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds BARD COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds BOREALIS PHILANTHROPY ↗
- Who funds GRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds V-Day ↗
- Who funds STERLING COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds NORTH STAR FUND INC ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE'S ACTION INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds ALLIED MEDIA PROJECTS INC ↗
- Who funds THE DEMOCRACY COLLABORATIVE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds GRASSROOTS GLOBAL JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Capital for Good USA ↗
- Who funds THE INSTITUTE FOR FAMILY HEALTH ↗
- Who funds THE POPULATION COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds GIRLS EDUCATIONAL AND MENTORING SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds THE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATI OF KINGSTON AND ULSTER COUNTY ↗
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: Common Counsel Foundation · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Community Foundations of the Hudson Valley Inc · Ms Foundation for Women Inc · Ulster Savings Charitable Foundation · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · New York Women's Foundation Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Seventh Generation Fund for Indigenous Peoples Inc · First Nations Development Institute · Tides 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 Novo 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.
- National Florence Crittenton Mission — 24% of income from government
- Sterling College — 10% of income from government
- Fusion Partnership Inc — 3% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston College — 3% of income from government
- Rising Tide Capital Inc and Subsidiaries — 2% of income from government
- Holistic Life Foundation Inc — 0% of income from government
- Rutgers University Foundation — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Novo Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Novo Foundation 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.