· Private foundation
Papanek Family Foundation
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ACLU FOUNDATION | $8,973 |
| INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE | $8,973 |
| UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST SERVICE COMMITTEE | $7,178 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA | $7,178 |
| SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER | $5,384 |
| INTERNATIONAL PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION | $5,384 |
| BRADY CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE | $4,993 |
| AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL USA | $3,901 |
| OXFAM AMERICA | $3,589 |
| HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | $3,589 |
| CENTER FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE | $3,589 |
| FIRST PARISH UNITARIAN BEDFORD | $1,795 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD LEAGUE OF MASSACHUSETTS | $1,482 |
| ACLU FOUNDATION | $1,404 |
| UNITED FOR FAIR ECONOMY | $1,404 |
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 87% 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.
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 +53% since the first grant, against +11% for the ones you funded once.
13 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 10 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, 51% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $35k 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
- IRInternational Rescue Committee INC6× · 2017–2024 · $35k · revenue +81%
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC5× · 2017–2021 · $35k · revenue +102%- UUUnitarian Universalist Service Committee Inc6× · 2017–2024 · $31k · revenue +27%
Funded once
- AFACLU FOUNDATIONone grant, 2024 · $10k
- PPPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICAone grant, 2024 · $7k
- IPINTERNATIONAL PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATIONone grant, 2024 · $5k
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 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…
In recognition of the fundamental principles of the universal declaration of human rights, international bridges to justice (ibj) is dedicated to protecting the basic legal rights of ordinary citizens in developing countries. specifically,…
To improve the lives and protect the rights of women, children and youth displaced by conflict and crisis. the women's refugee commission envisions a world in which refugees are safe, healthy and reliant and seeks to drive change in…
To advance human rights and social justice in the americas.
The institute is a leading research and policy organization committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights in the united states and globally.
The committee to protect journalists promotes press freedom worldwide and defends the right of journalists to report the news safely and without fear of reprisal. cpj ensures the free flow of news and commentary by taking action wherever…
Refugees international advocates for lifesaving assistance, human rights, and protection for displaced people and promotes solutions to displacement crisis.
Civicus is a global alliance of civil society organisations and activists dedicated to strengthening citizen action and civil society throughout the world.
To promote and protect human rights in the United States and around the world.
The Fund for Justice Education FJE was created to support the American Bar Associations ABA law-related and public services education programs.
The auschwitz institute for the prevention of genocide and mass atrocities is dedicated to building a world that prevents genocide. we aim to see every state effectively integrate within government the domestically developed function of…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Human Rights Watch Inc and the most unlike its peers is Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
14 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. 14 of the 23 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 International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Unitarian Universalist Service Committee Inc ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds BRADY CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE ↗
- Who funds OXFAM-AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INC ↗
- Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD LEAGUE OF MASSACHUSETTS INC ↗
- Who funds United for A Fair Economy Inc ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR THE STUDY OF INDEPENDENT SOCIAL IDEAS INC ↗
- Who funds LOUIS AUGUST JONAS FOUNDATION 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: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Papanek Family 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts Inc — 3% 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.