· Public charity
Public Interest Registry
PUBLIC INTEREST REGISTRY's mission is to support and to assist its sole member, the internet society, achieve its important and significant charitable mission, in among other ways, by operating the .org and other top level domains as an internet industry model and to serve in other ways to encourage and promote the open development,…
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k6 grants · $101k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
- $250k+3 grants · $61M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Internet Society (ISOC) | $29,000,000 |
| Internet Society Foundation | $29,000,000 |
| Connected Giving Foundation | $3,000,000 |
| Yellow Boat of Hope USA | $50,000 |
| Global Cyber Alliance | $45,833 |
| PREVENT CANCER FOUNDATION | $15,250 |
| Internet Education Foundation | $10,000 |
| Share Our Spare | $10,000 |
| Kiva Microfunds | $10,000 |
| Project CAMP Inc | $10,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY23–24, $60k) 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 your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
6 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.1M went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- ISINTERNET SOCIETY8× · 2017–2024 · $272M · revenue +21% · 82% of their budget
- ISINTERNET SOCIETY FOUNDATION8× · 2017–2024 · $191M · revenue -24% · 96% of their budget
- EENSET3× · 2017–2019 · $610k
Funded once
- HFHope for Justice Incone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -42%
UNIVERSITY OF OREGON FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $50k · revenue +50%- DFDays For Girls Internationalgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $45k · revenue +50%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
The global impact investing network, inc. is dedicated to increasing the scale and effectiveness of impact investing to solve systemic problems facing people and the planet. impact investments are investments made into companies,…
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…
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…
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
International consortium of investigative journalists, inc.'s (icij) mission is to show people how the world really works through stories that rock the world; forcing positive change.
Protecting and advancing freedom of expression and privacy in information and communications technology (ict) sector.
Water.org's goal is to bring safe water and sanitation to the world through access to small, affordable loans.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
The mission of the global alliance for improved nutrition (gain) is to improve the consumption of healthier diets for all, especially the most vulnerable, by improving the availability, affordability, desirability, and sustainability of…
The ifrs foundation's mission is to develop ifrs standards that bring transparency, accountability and efficiency to capital markets around the world. our work serves the public interest by fostering trust, growth and long-term financial…
(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.
The center for international private enterprise (cipe) is a non-profit global organization that works to strengthen democracy and build competitive, resilient markets in many of the world's most challenging environments. working alongside…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Good Sports Inc and the most unlike its peers is Herhealtheq Corp. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 20 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
30 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 30 of the 32 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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 INTERNET SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds INTERNET SOCIETY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CONNECTED GIVING FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL CYBER ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds Hope for Justice Inc ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF OREGON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Days For Girls International ↗
- Who funds 412 FOOD RESCUE INC ↗
- Who funds TECHSOUP GLOBAL ↗
- Who funds INTERNET EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Prevent Cancer Foundation aka Cancer Research & Prevention Fndn ↗
- Who funds VENICE FAMILY CLINIC FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NON-PROFIT TECHNOLOGY ENTERPRISE NETWORK DBA NTEN ↗
- Who funds HERHEALTHEQ CORP ↗
- Who funds GOOD SPORTS INC ↗
- Who funds WHOLIVES INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT CAMP INC ↗
- Who funds Zoe Empowers ↗
- Who funds KAGENO WORLDWIDE INC ↗
- Who funds SEEDING LABS A NON-PROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds Share our Spare ↗
- Who funds KAKENYA CENTER FOR EXCELLENCE ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MAIA ↗
- Who funds KIVA MICROFUNDS ↗
- Who funds PRO MUJER INC ↗
- Who funds ASSOCIATION FOR PROGRESSIVE COMMUNICATIONS ↗
- Who funds KKIS INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING AND EXPLOITED CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds DARKNESS TO LIGHT INC ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Tides Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · National Philanthropic Trust · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund
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 Public Interest Registry 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.
- Seeding Labs a Non-Profit Corporation — 1% of income from government
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.