Skip to content
Proof Alliance at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Proof Alliance

To prevent prenatal alcohol exposure and support all impacted by fetal alcohol spectrum disorders.

$1.3M
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$509k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Health$3.0MHuman Services$1.1MCrime & Legal$327kHousing & Shelter$283kEducation$206kEmployment$139kYouth Development$112kCommunity Improvement$10k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $44k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $63k
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.2M
$290,682
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WAYSIDE RECOVERY CENTER$509,160
FAMILY SERVICE ROCHESTER$398,033
WELLCOME MANOR FAMILY SERVICES$290,682
MINO BIMAADIZIWIN WELNESS CLINIC (RED LAKE BAND OF CHIPPEWA INDIANS)$63,443
ENDAZHI-NITAAWIGING CHARTER SCHOOL$43,906
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 (FY19–25, $1.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%FAMILY SERVICE ROCHESTER: $398k → 9%THE LINK: $30k → 11%FAMILY SERVICE ROCHESTER: $320k → 9%The Link: $29k → 11%Family Service Rochester: $247k → 9%Avivo: $250k → 11%AVIVO: $118k → 11%MINNEAPOLIS AMERICAN INDIAN CENTER: $64k → 11%MINNEAPOLIS AMERICAN INDIAN CENTER: $43k → 11%Minneapolis American Indian Center: $36k → 11%Minneapolis American Indian Center: $36k → 11%MINNEAPOLIS AMERICAN INDIAN CENTER: $29k → 11%DIVISION OF INDIAN WORK: $73k → 11%Division of Indian Work: $66k → 11%Division of Indian Work: $56k → 11%DIVISION OF INDIAN WORK: $53k → 11%DIVISION OF INDIAN WORK: $50k → 11%DIVISION OF INDIAN WORK: $35k → 11%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.
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.0M · 14 repeat orgs$152k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
2

Total granted

$5.0M
$45k

Still filing today

86%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $107k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthCrime & LegalEmploymentOther
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

  • A
    AVIVO
    2× · 2023–2024 · $369k · revenue +11%
  • DO
    DIVISION OF INDIAN WORK
    6× · 2019–2024 · $333k · revenue +148%
  • SM
    SOUTHERN MN REGIONAL LEGAL SERVICES INC
    5× · 2019–2024 · $327k · revenue +73%

Funded once

  • CR
    Cermak Rhoades Architects
    one grant, 2019 · $32k
  • FD
    FOND DU LAC TRIBAL & COMMUNITY COLLEGE
    one grant, 2022 · $12k
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
African Development Center

Grow businesses, build wealth and increase reinvestement in the african communities of minnesota

Human Services
2
Mn Community Measurement

Mn community measurement empowers stakeholders with meaningful information to drive improvement.

Health
3
Women Winning

To encourage, promote, support, and elect pro-choice women of all political parties to all levels of public office in minnesota.

Public Benefit
4
United Way of Ne Minnesota

United way of northeastern minnesota invests in nonprofits, programs, and collaborations that equip and empower, creating opportunities for people to thrive in our communities.

—
5
West Central Initiative

Serving to improve west central minnesota through funding, programs, and technical assistance. vision of a vibrant, inclusive, and sustainable world starts here in west central minnesota.

Philanthropy
6
Regional West Health Services

Health care services for the people of western nebraska and eastern wyoming.

Health
7
Connectability of Mn Inc

Connectability of mn, inc. works to advance the independence, productivity, and full citizenship of people experiencing physical or invisible barriers.

—
8
Minnesota Valley Action Council Inc

Develop resources and opportunities which empower people and communities.

Community Improvement
9
FamilyWise Services

Strengthening families by promoting the safety, stability and wellbeing of children.

Health
10
Minnesota Business Partnership

The minnesota business partnership's mission is to maintain a high quality of life for all minnesotans by ensuring that the state's economy remains strong, globally competitive and its prospects for growth bright by working with elected…

—
11
Minnesota Land Trust

The minnesota land trust protects and restores minnesota's most vital natural lands in order to provide wildlife habitat, clean water, outdoor experiences and scenic beauty for generations to come.

Environment
12
Keystone Community Services

To strengthen the capacity of individuals and families to improve their quality of life.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Avivo; the most unlike its peers is Wellcome Manor Family Services. 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

13 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. 13 of the 18 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
8/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WAYSIDE HOUSE INC: $1,394,928 · OtherWAYSIDE HOUSE INCMINNESOTA INDIAN WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER: $193,616 · OtherMINNESOTA INDIAN WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTERSCHOOL LAW CENTER: $149,163 · OtherSCHOOL LAW CENTERTree Trust: $111,094 · OtherTree Trust+5 more: $199,601 · Other+5 moreFAMILY SERVICE ROCHESTER INC: $964,706 · Human ServicesFAMILY SERVICE ROCHESTER INCAVIVO: $368,502 · Human ServicesAVIVODIVISION OF INDIAN WORK: $333,145 · Human ServicesDIVISION OF INDIAN WORKMinneapolis American Indian Center: $208,532 · Human ServicesMinneapolis American Indian Center+1 more: $59,000 · Human ServicesWellcome Manor Family Services: $569,198 · HealthWellcome Manor Fa…NATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITY CLINIC: $221,835 · HealthNATIVE AMERICAN C…SOUTHERN MN REGIONAL LEGAL SERVICES INC: $326,968 · Crime & LegalCHOICE UNLIMITED: $80,600 · Employment
Other$2,048,402Human Services$1,933,885Health$791,033Crime & Legal$326,968Employment$80,600

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWAYSIDE HOUSE INC: $1,394,928 over 3y, 5.2% of budgetFAMILY SERVICE ROCHESTER INC: $964,706 over 3y, 3.7% of budgetWellcome Manor Family Services: $569,198 over 3y, 5.7% of budgetAVIVO: $368,502 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetDIVISION OF INDIAN WORK: $333,145 over 6y, 2.2% of budgetSOUTHERN MN REGIONAL LEGAL SERVICES INC: $326,968 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetNATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITY CLINIC: $221,835 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetMinneapolis American Indian Center: $208,532 over 5y, 1.5% of budgetMINNESOTA INDIAN WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER: $193,616 over 4y, 1.9% of budgetTree Trust: $111,094 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetCHOICE UNLIMITED: $80,600 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetTHE LINK: $59,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetENDAZHI-NITAAWIGING CHARTER SCHOOL: $43,906 over 1y, 1.5% 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 WAYSIDE HOUSE INC ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY SERVICE ROCHESTER INC ↗
  • Who funds Wellcome Manor Family Services ↗
  • Who funds AVIVO ↗
  • Who funds DIVISION OF INDIAN WORK ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHERN MN REGIONAL LEGAL SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITY CLINIC ↗
  • Who funds Minneapolis American Indian Center ↗
  • Who funds MINNESOTA INDIAN WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds Tree Trust ↗
  • Who funds CHOICE UNLIMITED ↗
  • Who funds THE LINK ↗
  • Who funds ENDAZHI-NITAAWIGING CHARTER SCHOOL ↗

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.

Otto Bremer TrustSaint Paul & Minnesot…The Minneapolis Found…The Sauer Family Foun…Mightycause Charitabl…Medica FoundationGreater Twin Cities U…Pohlad Family Foundat…First Nations Develop…The Richard M Schulze…Xcel Energy FoundationBCBSM Foundation Inc
Otto Bremer TrustMN24.8× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Otto Bremer Trust · Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation · The Minneapolis Foundation · The Sauer Family Foundation · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Medica Foundation · Greater Twin Cities United Way · Pohlad Family Foundation · First Nations Development Institute · The Richard M Schulze Family Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · BCBSM Foundation Inc

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 Proof Alliance funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Proof Alliance. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely 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 18 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 Proof Alliance’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home