Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Posner Center for International Development

The posner center's mission is to catalyze the global development community, at home and abroad, to collaborate for greater impact, with a vision for a more equitable and prosperous world.

$61k
Granted FY2022
4
Grants FY2022
2
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172022.

International$113kEducation$28kEnvironment$26kRecreation & Sports$20kCommunity Improvement$15kPhilanthropy$15kHealth$15kFood & Nutrition$10k
02FY2022 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$15,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$315k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE RECREATION PROJECT$20,000
RANGE OF MOTION PROJECT$15,000
SHADHIKA$15,000
THE CHIJNAYA FOUNDATION$11,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–20, $32k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%AFRICA DEVELOPMENT PROMISE: $20k → 12%AFRICA DEVELOPMENT PROMISE: $12k → 12%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

03Your field

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.

1
Building Schools in Africa
Education
2
Strategies for International Development

Strategies for International Development (SID) develops, applies, and promotes better methods for eradicating rural poverty. We help small farmers make the transition from subsistence to successful commercial farming. We carryout programs…

International
3
Educate Girls

Educate Girls promotes and protects the right of girls to a quality education and works by supporting partners in geographies where the need is greatest to mobilize communities, enroll girls into school and improve learning outcomes. Our…

International
4
Rise International

RISE builds primary schools in rural Angola to educate children, empower communities and contribute to the rebuilding of the country.

International
5
Zoe Empowers

Zoe Empowers is a global network of local organizations throughout Africa and India providing a replicable and scalable framework whereby youth led or resourced families are provided the training, resources, and community support to become…

International
6
Splash International

The mission of Splash International and its subsidiaries is to ensure clean water for children. Splash partners with governments and local organizations to deliver sustainable water, sanitation, hygiene, and menstrual health programs in…

Environment
7
Africa Agility

Our mission is to equip underserved youthespecially women and girls with future-ready skills in technology Agile methodologies and entrepreneurship empowering them to access dignified work drive innovation and compete globally.

Education
8
Direct Action for Women Now World-Wide Inc Formerly Indias Daughters Inc
Philanthropy
9
Empowering Lives International

Empowering Lives International (ELI) ignites world changers. We equip families and orphans to crush poverty, embrace Christ, and share their transformation with others through their God-honoring income, their deepening relationship with…

Religion
10
Charity Global Inc

Charity: water is a non-profit organization bringing clean and safe water to people around the world. continued on schedule o.

Human Services
11
Girls Education Collaborative Inc

GEC partners with locally-led organizations to catalyze and support sustainable, community-driven solutions that remove social, economic, and gender-based barriers keeping girls out of school in under-resourced regions of the global south.

International
12
Annapurna Global Foundation
Philanthropy

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Chijnaya Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Elephant Energy 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 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/14
Grantees still filing
7/14
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ENTERPRISES — $21,400 · InternationalINTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ENTERPRISESENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS- INTERNATIONAL — $16,500 · InternationalENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS- INTERNATION…GLOBAL HOPE NETWORK INTL INC — $11,400 · InternationalGLOBAL HOPE NETWORK INTL INCAFRICA SCHOOL ASSISTANCE PROJECT — $11,400 · InternationalAFRICA SCHOOL ASSISTANCE PROJECTTHE CHIJNAYA FOUNDATION INC — $11,000 · InternationalTHE CHIJNAYA FOUNDATION INCGLOBAL SEED SAVERS — $10,000 · InternationalGLOBAL SEED SAVERSShadhika Project — $35,000 · OtherShadhika ProjectMARSHALL DIRECT FUND — $15,000 · OtherMARSHALL DIRECT FUNDELEPHANT ENERGY INC — $15,000 · OtherELEPHANT ENERGY INCAFRICA DEVELOPMENT PROMISE — $32,000 · Human ServicesAFRICA DEVELOPM…REGIS UNIVERSITY — $18,000 · EducationREGIS UNIVER…The Girls Athletic Leadership School of Denver — $9,650 · EducationThe Girls At…RECREATION PROJECT — $20,000 · Recreation & SportsRECREATIO…Range Of Motion Project — $15,000 · Health
International$81,700Other$65,000Human Services$32,000Education$27,650Recreation & Sports$20,000Health$15,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetShadhika Project — $35,000 over 2y, 5.0% of budgetAFRICA DEVELOPMENT PROMISE — $32,000 over 2y, 9.9% of budgetINTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ENTERPRISES — $21,400 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRECREATION PROJECT — $20,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetREGIS UNIVERSITY — $18,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetELEPHANT ENERGY INC — $15,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetRange Of Motion Project — $15,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetGLOBAL HOPE NETWORK INTL INC — $11,400 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE CHIJNAYA FOUNDATION INC — $11,000 over 1y, 3.5% of budget
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.

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.

Globalgiving Foundation IncDC15.1× affinity5 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Globalgiving Foundation Inc · Colorado Gives Foundation · The Denver Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Posner Center for International Development 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%your share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 14 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph