Loading…
· Public charity
PROJECT LIBERTY INSTITUTE
To promote the advancement and use of information technology for the common good of humanity in support of sustainable democracy and a more equitable economy.
$285k
Granted FY2024
3
Grants
3
Communities
$120k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2021–2024.
Education$13MScience & Tech$7.3MPublic Benefit$500kArts & Culture$425kInternational$70kSocial Science$25kPhilanthropy$20k
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2021
georgetownawarenesssciences statessciences pos
2022
dialoguedeeplisteningconnectiontechnologies methodsmethods advanceadvance accelerate
2023
youngdiscussionstogethermembershipmultiple fieldsexplore effectshost
2024
supportscontrolrankingalgorithmssocial
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2024 · 3 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $190k
$70,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$7.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
- MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY$120,000
- MEDIATORS FOUNDATION INC$70,000
- RADICALXCHANGE FOUNDATION LTD$25,000
02The need
04
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:
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY21–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13% — the area typically sits at 9%. 65% of your dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — 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
President and Fellows of Harvard College
Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.
Education
2
Paradox Science Institute
Science & Tech
3
Westminster University
Offer undergraduate and graduate degrees in liberal arts and professional programs.
Education
4
The George Washington University
Education and research
Education
5
Boston Architectural College
Founded 131 years ago, the boston architectural college is a recognized institution providing excellence in practice-integrated design education to members of diverse communities with students representing 35 countries. the bac offers…
—
6
Mit Free Speech Alliance
To promote free expression, academic freedom, viewpoint diversity, and open scientific inquiry in the MIT community
Civil Rights
7
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Welfare Benefit Plans Trust
To provide health and life insurance benefits to covered eligible retirees of massachusetts institute of technology and their dependents, as well as individuals receiving long-term disability benefits for at least three years.
Membership Benefit
8
New York University
Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes.
Education
9
Technology Policy Institute
International
10
Council of Graduate Schools
Dedicated to the improvement and advancement of graduate education.
Education
11
University of Massachusetts Global
The mission of umass global is to provide students dynamic education based on excellence and flexibility that creates lasting value and relevance for evolving careers.
Education
12
The Rockefeller University
A world-renowned center for research and graduate education.
Education
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mediators Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 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
10 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
10/10
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Education$12,645,581Science & Tech$7,325,581Public Benefit$500,000Arts & Culture$425,000International$70,000Social Science$25,000Philanthropy$20,000
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 MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ↗
- Who funds CORTICO ↗
- Who funds GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds US SCIENCES PO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HETERODOX ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds ISSUE ONE ↗
- Who funds COMMON SENSE MEDIA ↗
- Who funds MEDIATORS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds RADICALXCHANGE FOUNDATION LTD ↗
- Who funds THE HOPEWELL FUND ↗
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.
National Philanthropic TrustPA10.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc
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 organisation PROJECT LIBERTY INSTITUTE 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.
2024
’20’21’22’23’24
- Cortico Corporation — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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.
04Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: US SCIENCES PO FOUNDATION.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
medium risk
~5 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 3.3× since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 270559416 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on US SCIENCES PO FOUNDATION, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- WatchFinancial stability— Roughly 5 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
- WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 74% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Project Liberty Institute?
Find your warmest path to Project Liberty Institute through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines