Skip to content

· Public charity

Population Reference Bureau Inc

PRB harnesses the power of population data to inform and advance solutions to the most urgent challenges facing our world and improve the well-being of people globally.

$1.4M
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$854k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$4.4MScience & Tech$4.0MEducation$3.9MHuman Services$581kInternational$382kEmployment$227kEnvironment$73kCivil Rights$20kOther$0
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $1,140,544, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,367,576 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $227,032 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.
$854,183
Median grant
1
States reached
$12M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JSI Research & Training Institute$854,183
President and Fellows of Harvard College$286,361
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 (FY19–22, $845k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%INTERNATIONAL YOUTH ALLIANCE FOR FAMILY PLANNING: $428k → 14%INTERNATIONAL YOUTH ALLIANCE FOR FAMILY PLANNING: $160k → 14%INTERNATIONAL YOUTH ALLIANCE FOR FAMILY PLANNING: $135k → 14%INTERNATIONAL YOUTH ALLIANCE FOR FAMILY PLANNING: $122k → 14%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.

Grants abroad, by region: $224k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 2 regions, $213k to organizations and $11k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$220k · 98% · 2 grants · 13 people

Stated purpose: Develop data-driven childcare policy recommendations for working women in Senegal · Analysis and technical assistance on women's unpaid care work · Produce media content on unpaid care domestic work

South Asia$4k · 2% · 5 people

Stated purpose: Support reporting on primary healthcare access and delivery in low- and middle-income countries

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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 9% of Population Reference Bureau Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 14% of the giving stays in DC; by stated purpose, 10%.

Population Reference Bureau Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 4.5% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
$10M · 5 repeat orgs$202k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +30% since the first grant, against +15% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
5

Total granted

$10M
$202k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+30%
+15%

Still filing today

60%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationSocial ScienceCivil RightsHuman ServicesHealthOther
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

  • JSI RESEARCH & TRAINING INSTITUTE INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $8.2M · revenue +34%
  • DR
    DEVELOPING RADIO PARTNERS INC
    7× · 2018–2024 · $857k · revenue +30% · 94% of their budget
  • TI
    THE INTERNATIONAL YOUTH ALLIANCE FOR FAMILY PLANNING
    4× · 2019–2022 · $845k · revenue -90% · 75% of their budget

Funded once

  • WW
    WOODROW WILSON INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR SCHOLARS
    one grant, 2018 · $73k · revenue +19%
  • AH
    AVENIR HEALTH INC
    one grant, 2022 · $66k · revenue -9%
  • NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITYgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $23k · revenue +110%
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
Foreign Policy Research Institute

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…

International
2
The National Bureau of Asian Research

Nbr conducts advanced independent research on strategic, political, economic, energy, globalization, and health issues affecting u.s. relations with asia. drawing upon an extensive network of the world's leading specialists and leveraging…

—
3
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research

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…

Social Science
4
World Resources Institute

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…

International
5
Peter G Peterson Institute for International Economics

The peterson institute for international economics (piie) is an independent nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to strengthening prosperity and human welfare in the global economy through expert analysis and practical…

Social Science
6
The International Institute for Strategic Studies - Us

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,…

International
7
American Press Institute Inc

American press institute acts as a scout on the frontier of technology and audience behavior to identify where change is occurring and helps news organizations learn how to implement and scale that change successfully so they have a…

Arts & Culture
8
Fielding Graduate University

We provide exemplary interdisciplinary programs for a community of scholar-practitioners within a distributed learning model grounded in student-driven inquiry and leading to enhanced knowledge.

—
9
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
10
The Rand Corporation

Help improve policy and decision making through research and analysis.

Public Benefit
11
International Peace Institute Inc

The international peace institute (ipi) bridges policy and real-world diplomacy, advising global leaders and shaping innovative policy solutions across the multilateral system, governments, and beyond through independent research and…

International
12
American Institute of Physics Inc

Aip advances the physical sciences as a federation and an institute. as a federation, aip works to advance the success of its member societies and affiliates so that they can leverage their diverse expertise and contributions in advancing…

Science & Tech
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Migration Policy Institute; the most unlike its peers is The International Youth Alliance for Family Planning. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

9 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. 9 of the 11 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JSI RESEARCH & TRAINING INSTITUTE INC: $8,186,564 · OtherJSI RESEARCH & TRAINING INSTITUTE INC+3 more: $439,775 · OtherPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $3,107,549 · EducationPresident and Fellows of Harvard …DEVELOPING RADIO PARTNERS INC: $857,379 · EducationDEVELOPING RADIO PARTNERS INC+1 more: $22,500 · EducationTHE INTERNATIONAL YOUTH ALLIANCE FOR FAMILY PLANNING: $845,266 · Human ServicesWOODROW WILSON INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR SCHOLARS: $73,177 · Social ScienceAVENIR HEALTH INC: $66,258 · HealthMIGRATION POLICY INSTITUTE: $20,000 · Civil Rights
Other$8,626,339Education$3,987,428Human Services$845,266Social Science$73,177Health$66,258Civil Rights$20,000

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 budgetJSI RESEARCH & TRAINING INSTITUTE INC: $8,186,564 over 6y, 0.9% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $3,107,549 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetDEVELOPING RADIO PARTNERS INC: $857,379 over 7y, 94% of budgetTHE INTERNATIONAL YOUTH ALLIANCE FOR FAMILY PLANNING: $845,266 over 4y, 75% of budgetWOODROW WILSON INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR SCHOLARS: $73,177 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetAVENIR HEALTH INC: $66,258 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetNORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY: $22,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPOPULATION ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA INC: $20,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetMIGRATION POLICY INSTITUTE: $20,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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.

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.

Gates FoundationWA15.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gates Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Population Reference Bureau Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Population Reference Bureau Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • Jsi Research & Training Institute Inc: 69% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
  • Northeastern University: 7% of income from government
  • Avenir Health Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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 11 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 Population Reference Bureau’s filings →

More from the funding graph