Skip to content

· Private foundation

Price 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.

$265k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it funds
0183% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Health$987kInternational$250kHuman Services$168kEnvironment$90kOther$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k10 grants · $215k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$25,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$5.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FOUNDATION GREAT RIVERS$50,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FOUNDATION OF GREATER TEXAS$40,000
GLOBAL LINKS$30,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FOUNDATION$30,000
Individual grant recipient$25,000
BRIGID ALLIANCE$25,000
FUND TEXAS CHOICE$25,000
FOREST SERVICE EMPLOYEES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS$10,000
ENGENDERHEALTH$10,000
TRUST WOMEN$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
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 (FY22–25, $100k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, 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%BRIGID ALLIANCE: $25k → 17%BRIGID ALLIANCE: $25k → 17%BRIGID ALLIANCE: $25k → 17%BRIGID ALLIANCE: $25k → 17%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

NY
OR
PA
CT
MO
VA
KS
DC
TX
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.5M · 16 repeat orgs$125k to everyone else

16 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
3

Total granted

$1.5M
$125k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+14%
+40%

Still filing today

56%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalHealthEnvironmentHuman ServicesOther
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

  • TB
    THE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $100k · revenue +42%
  • MC
    MIGRANT CLINICIANS NETWORK INC
    4× · 2020–2023 · $92k · revenue +55%
  • EI
    ENGENDERHEALTH INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $60k · revenue +83%

Funded once

  • PP
    Planned Parenthood Fdtn of Greater TX
    one grant, 2020 · $65k
  • PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue +40%
  • FS
    Forest Service Emp for Enviro Ethics
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
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
Pathfinder International

Pathfinder expands access to sexual and reproductive health services, opening the door to opportunities for women and all individuals to thrive-economically, educationally, and civically. driven by our country-led leadership and local…

International
2
The Population Council Inc

We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world. we take a multidisciplinary, intergenerational, life-cycle approach that contributes to (see schedule o)four global…

International
3
Management Sciences for Health Inc

(msh) saves lives and improves the health of the world's poorest (see schedule o) and most vulnerable people by closing the gap between knowledge and action in public health.

International
4
Direct Action for Women Now World-Wide Inc Formerly Indias Daughters Inc
Philanthropy
5
Women in Global Health Inc

Women in global health (wgh) is a global movement and organization that brings together all genders and backgrounds to achieve gender equality in global health leadership.

Public Benefit
6
Guttmacher Institute Inc

The institute is a leading research and policy organization committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights in the united states and globally.

—
7
Intrahealth International Inc

Our mission is to improve the performance of health workers and strengthen the systems in which they work.

Health
8
Project Hope - the People-to-People Health Foundation Inc

To conduct and support programs and activities aimed at solving some of the world's greatest public health challenges, with a specific focus on enabling health workers to have the greatest possible impact on the health of the people they…

International
9
The Center for Reproductive Rights Inc

The center for reproductive rights ("the center") is an international non-governmental organization that uses the power of law to advance reproductive rights as fundamental human rights around the world.

Civil Rights
10
Water for People

Water for people exists to develop high quality water and sanitation, accessible to all, and sustained by strong communities, businesses, and governments, working in ten countries; guatemala, honduras, tanzania, peru, bolivia, uganda,…

International
11
Arrow

To make grants to charitable organizations and programs that support the achievement of sexual and reproductive health (srh) of the poor & underprivileged women and others in the asia-pacific and elsewhere.

International
12
Global Poverty Project Inc

Our mission is to build a movement of global citizens whose actions will help achieve our vision of a world without extreme poverty.

Social Science
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Engenderhealth Inc; the most unlike its peers is Trust Women Foundation 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

11 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. 11 of the 20 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
7/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PLANNED PARENTHOOD FOUNDATION OF GREATER TEXAS: $290,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD FOUNDATION OF GREATER TEXASPLANNED PARENTHOOD FOUNDATION: $170,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD FOUNDATIONPLANNED PARENTHOOD FOUNDATION GREAT RIVERS: $100,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD FOUNDATION GREAT RIVERSYWCA: $68,000 · OtherYWCAPlanned Parenthood Fdtn of Greater TX: $65,000 · OtherPlanned Parenthood Fdtn of Greater TXIndividual grant recipient: $60,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientFOREST SERVICE EMPLOYEES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS INC: $50,000 · OtherFOREST SERVICE EMPLOYEES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS INCIndividual grant recipient: $40,000 · OtherHAAM: $40,000 · Other+2 more: $40,000 · OtherGLOBAL LINKS: $180,000 · InternationalGLOBAL LINKSENGENDERHEALTH INC: $60,000 · InternationalENGENDERHEALTH INCSave The Children Federation Inc: $40,000 · InternationalSave The Children Fed…ASHOKA: $30,000 · InternationalASHOKAMIGRANT CLINICIANS NETWORK INC: $92,000 · HealthMIGRANT CLINIC…Trust Women Foundation Inc: $60,000 · HealthTrust Women Fo…PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $50,000 · HealthPLANNED PARENT…FUND TEXAS CHOICE: $100,000 · EnvironmentTHE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC: $100,000 · Human Services
Other$923,000International$310,000Health$202,000Environment$100,000Human Services$100,000

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 budgetGLOBAL LINKS: $180,000 over 6y, 0.7% of budgetFUND TEXAS CHOICE: $100,000 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetTHE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC: $100,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetMIGRANT CLINICIANS NETWORK INC: $92,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetTrust Women Foundation Inc: $60,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetENGENDERHEALTH INC: $60,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetFOREST SERVICE EMPLOYEES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS INC: $50,000 over 5y, 2.4% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSave The Children Federation Inc: $40,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetASHOKA: $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% 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 GLOBAL LINKS ↗
  • Who funds FUND TEXAS CHOICE ↗
  • Who funds THE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds MIGRANT CLINICIANS NETWORK INC ↗
  • Who funds Trust Women Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds ENGENDERHEALTH INC ↗
  • Who funds FOREST SERVICE EMPLOYEES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS INC ↗
  • Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds ASHOKA ↗

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.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Price Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Price Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 30%
  • Save the Children Federation Inc: 30% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Price Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Price Foundation 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.

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 20 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-PF 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 Price’s filings →

More from the funding graph