Skip to content
Pan American Development Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Pan American Development Foundation

The PAN AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION (padf) saves lives, promotes economic growth, and advances security and rule of law.

$45M
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$356k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Crime & Legal$4.5MInternational$3.4MSocial Science$1.2MCivil Rights$550kCommunity Improvement$289kArts & Culture$245kEnvironment$234kHuman Services$172kOther$0
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 13 grants below total $1,478,496, the rows itemized in this filing. The $45,161,417 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $43,682,921 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.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $15k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $89k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $703k
  • $250k+2 grants · $671k
$54,060
Median grant
6
States reached
$68M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HIVE INTERNATIONAL LLC$356,385
OAS ORGANIZATION OF THE AMERICAN STATES$314,545
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO$243,706
THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION FUND FOR JUSTICE AND EDUCATION$193,838
HUMANS CAPITAL FOR THE WORLD INC$81,498
CRESPIN ENTERPRISES INC DBA COLLABORATEUP$78,905
UNIDOS SIN FRONTERAS INC$54,060
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIAION OF DIRECTORS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT STANDAR$51,088
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LEGAL LLC$44,000
ROBERT F KENEDY HUMAN RIGTHS ORG$30,000
LAB4U INC$14,993
V5 INITIATIVE INC$9,038
SMART RISK CONSULTING LLC$6,440
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 (FY21–25, $442k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%UNIDOS SIN FRONTERAS INC: $216k → 13%UNIDOS SIN FRONTERAS INC: $85k → 13%UNIDOS SIN FRONTERAS INC: $75k → 13%UNIDOS SIN FRONTERAS INC: $54k → 13%UNIDOS SIN FRONTERAS INC: $12k → 13%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

ID
IL
CA
VA
MD
DC
AL
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $43M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions, $43M to organizations and $608k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

South America$31M · 71% · 114 grants · 2629 people

Stated purpose: SAVE LIVES · PROMOTE ECONOMIC GROWTH · ADVANCE SECURITY & RULE OF LAW

Central America and the Caribbean$11M · 26% · 206 grants

Stated purpose: SAVE LIVES · PROMOTE ECONOMIC GROWTH · ADVANCE SECURITY & RULE OF LAW

North America (Canada and Mexico)$1.1M · 3% · 8 grants

Stated purpose: PROMOTE ECONOMIC GROWTH · ADVANCE SECURITY & RULE OF LAW

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$12M · 24 repeat orgs$246k to everyone else

24 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

24
5

Total granted

$12M
$246k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+6%
+30%

Still filing today

46%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
Crime & LegalSocial ScienceArts & CultureHuman ServicesInternationalEducationOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • IC
    INSIGHT CRIME INCORPORATED
    4× · 2021–2024 · $1.4M · revenue +4% · 32% of their budget
  • NATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER
    2× · 2023–2024 · $857k · revenue +14%
  • IF
    INNOVATIONS FOR POVERTY ACTION A NONPROFIT CORPORATION
    2× · 2021–2022 · $690k · revenue +10%

Funded once

  • OE
    OAS EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT OF INTEGRAL DEVELOPMENT
    one grant, 2019 · $154k
  • IN
    INTERNEWS NETWORKgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $39k · revenue +31%
  • TG
    The George Washington Universitygraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $23k · revenue +30%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its 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
Sociedad Interamericana De Prensa Inc

Between 2024 and 2025, the committee on freedom of the press and information, together with its subcommittees on impunity and chapultepecsalta, participated in approximately nine activities. these included a panel discussion entitled…

Education
2
Washington Office On Latin America

To advance human rights and social justice in the americas.

International
3
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
4
Asociacion Interamericana Para La Defensa Del Ambiente

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.

Crime & Legal
5
Indigenous Peoples Rights Inc

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.

Human Services
6
Council of the Americas Inc

Council of the americas is a business organization whose members share a common commitment to economic and social development, open markets, the rule of law, and democracy throughout the americas. the council's membership consists of…

—
7
Progressive International Exchange

Progressive international exchange will engage in three general categories of activity. 1. digital education, which refers to online programming such as lectures, webinars, and briefings that offer insights about important international…

International
8
Para Ti Global
—
9
International Council On Environmental Economics and Development Union
Human Services
10
Global Policy Forum Inc

Research and education of United Nations activities

International
11
International Center for Research On Women

The international center for research for women (icrw) is a global research institute, with a mission to advance rights and opportunities for women, girls, and structurally excluded populations with actionable evidence and solutions.

International
12
Center for International Private Enterprise Inc

The center for international private enterprise (cipe) is a non-profit global organization that works to strengthen democracy and build competitive, resilient markets in many of the world's most challenging environments. working alongside…

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Insight Crime Incorporated; the most unlike its peers is Para La Naturaleza 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

14 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. 14 of the 29 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
9/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

OAS ORGANIZATION OF THE AMERICAN STATES: $1,663,865 · OtherOAS ORGANIZATION OF THE AMERICAN STATESOAS ORGANIZATION OF THE AMERICAN STATES: $1,300,020 · OtherOAS ORGANIZATION OF THE AMERICAN STATESPMART CONSULTANCY: $828,024 · OtherPMART CONSULTANCYHIVE INTERNATIONAL LLC: $506,385 · OtherHIVE INTERNATIONAL LLCUSA LATIN NETWORKING LLC: $397,862 · OtherUSA LATIN NETWORKING LLCUNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO: $394,453 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIOHUMANS CAPITAL FOR THE WORLD INC: $307,461 · OtherINTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF DIRECTORS OF LAW(IADLEST): $276,951 · Other+12 more: $949,963 · Other+12 moreAmerican Bar Association Fund for Justice and Education: $1,861,838 · Crime & LegalAmerican Bar Association Fund…INSIGHT CRIME INCORPORATED: $1,352,987 · Crime & LegalINSIGHT CRIME INCORPORATEDNATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER: $856,820 · Social ScienceNATIONAL OPINI…INNOVATIONS FOR POVERTY ACTION A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $690,004 · Social ScienceINNOVATIONS FO…UNIDOS SIN FRONTERAS: $442,181 · Human ServicesPARA LA NATURALEZA INC: $190,000 · EnvironmentTHE DUE PROCESS OF LAW FOUNDATION: $62,006 · Arts & CultureINTERNEWS NETWORK: $38,718 · Arts & CultureWORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $50,000 · International
Other$6,624,984Crime & Legal$3,214,825Social Science$1,546,824Human Services$442,181Environment$190,000Arts & Culture$100,724International$50,000

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 budgetAmerican Bar Association Fund for Justice and Education: $1,861,838 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetINSIGHT CRIME INCORPORATED: $1,352,987 over 4y, 32% of budgetNATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER: $856,820 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetINNOVATIONS FOR POVERTY ACTION A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $690,004 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetUNIDOS SIN FRONTERAS: $442,181 over 5y, 68% of budgetINTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF DIRECTORS OF LAW(IADLEST): $276,951 over 3y, 7.7% of budgetPARA LA NATURALEZA INC: $190,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetTHE DUE PROCESS OF LAW FOUNDATION: $62,006 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetWORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $50,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetV5 INITIATIVE INC: $43,492 over 2y, 22% of budgetROBERT F KENNEDY CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS: $40,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetINTERNEWS NETWORK: $38,718 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetThe George Washington University: $23,100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIESA FOUNDATION: $14,902 over 1y, 2.1% 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.

  • Who funds American Bar Association Fund for Justice and Education ↗
  • Who funds INSIGHT CRIME INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER ↗
  • Who funds INNOVATIONS FOR POVERTY ACTION A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds UNIDOS SIN FRONTERAS ↗
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF DIRECTORS OF LAW(IADLEST) ↗
  • Who funds PARA LA NATURALEZA INC ↗
  • Who funds THE DUE PROCESS OF LAW FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds V5 INITIATIVE INC ↗
  • Who funds ROBERT F KENNEDY CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS ↗
  • Who funds INTERNEWS NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds The George Washington University ↗
  • Who funds IESA FOUNDATION ↗

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.

National Endowment fo…Wellspring Philanthro…Paypal Charitable Giv…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Endowment for DemocracyDC13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Endowment for Democracy · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Pan American Development Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Pan American Development Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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.

    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 29 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 Pan American Development’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