· Private foundation
Omidyar Network Fund Inc
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 FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k35 grants · $108k
- $10k–50k45 grants · $1.3M
- $50k–250k106 grants · $13M
- $250k+56 grants · $23M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Santa Fe Institute of Science | $1,250,000 |
| Korean Immigrant Workers Advocates of Southern California | $1,100,000 |
| Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc | $1,000,000 |
| Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc | $1,000,000 |
| Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc | $1,000,000 |
| Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc | $900,000 |
| United Nations Economic Commission for Africa | $800,000 |
| Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc | $600,000 |
| Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc | $562,500 |
| Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc | $562,500 |
| Economic Policy Institute Inc | $500,000 |
| Swiss Philanthropy Foundation | $500,000 |
| Swiss Philanthropy Foundation | $500,000 |
| Economic Policy Institute Inc | $500,000 |
| Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc | $475,000 |
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 US giving — 78% of grant dollars ($170M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 22% that went abroad ($48M) is mapped below.
Your human-services grants (FY20–24, $4.7M) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 97% 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
Beyond the US — 22% of all-years giving ($48M)
19 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 8% of Omidyar Network Fund Inc’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.
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.
213 repeat relationships — 103 still active in FY2024, 110 since wound down; 65 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, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9.1M 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
- CFCADASTA FOUNDATION2× · 2020–2021 · $4.0M · revenue +51% · 63% of their budget
- TRTHE ROOSEVELT INSTITUTE5× · 2020–2024 · $3.5M · revenue +8%
- WCWASHINGTON CENTER FOR EQUITABLE GROWTH INC4× · 2020–2024 · $2.5M · revenue +10%
Funded once
- IIInternational Institute of Information Technology Bangaloreone grant, 2020 · $2.0M
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2020 · $2.0M
- FHFINANCIAL HEALTH NETWORK INCone grant, 2020 · $1.2M · revenue -28%
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.
The common application is a not-for-profit membership organization of over 1,100 colleges and universities across the globe committed to access, equity, and integrity in the college admission process. every year, over 1.5 million students…
The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…
See schedule onorc at the university of chicago conducts research and data science on critical societal issues to guide decision-making and the development of programs and public policy. our experts identify relationships and trends, and…
We empower directors and transform boards to be future ready.
Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
To provide accurate, objective information and analysis on international strategic issues for legislators, diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business leaders, economists, the military, defense commentators, journalists,…
Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…
Upturn advances equity and justice in the design, governance, and use of technology.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Policylink and the most unlike its peers is Radicalxchange Foundation Ltd. 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 24 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.2% 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.
441 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. 441 of the 616 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 NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
- Who funds ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC ↗
- Who funds Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds CADASTA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE ROOSEVELT INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds ECONOMIC POLICY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON CENTER FOR EQUITABLE GROWTH INC ↗
- Who funds Jobs with Justice Education Fund ↗
- Who funds WATERFORD INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds MOZILLA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds KOREAN IMMIGRANT WORKERS ADVOCATES OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds DEMOS A NETWORK FOR IDEAS AND ACTION LTD ↗
- Who funds NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds POLICYLINK ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS ↗
- Who funds KHAN ACADEMY INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION ↗
- Who funds THE LAND ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds CONSUMER REPORTS INC ↗
- Who funds The New School ↗
- Who funds UBONGO INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds National Domestic Workers Alliance 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: The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Foundation to Promote Open Society · The Ford Foundation · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · Democracy Fund Inc · New Venture Fund · The Nathan Cummings Foundation Inc · The Rockefeller Foundation · Gates Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Heising-Simons Foundation · Surdna Foundation Inc
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 Omidyar Network 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.
- Child Trends Inc — 50% of income from government
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology — 35% of income from government
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- Social Finance Inc — 12% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Northeastern University — 7% of income from government
- Third Sector New England Inc — 3% of income from government
- Code for Science & Society Inc — 2% of income from government
- The Poynter Institute for Media Studies Inc — 1% of income from government
- All Our Kin Inc — 1% of income from government
- Oxfam-America Inc — 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 Omidyar Network Fund Inc?
Find your warmest path to Omidyar Network Fund 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.