· Private foundation
Public Safety Research Institute
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k26 grants · $61k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $30k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WorkBites | $20,000 |
| National Food Museum | $10,000 |
| Beyond Nuclear | $7,000 |
| Nuclear Info Resources Service | $7,000 |
| Veterans for Peace | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $4,000 |
| Beyond Pesticides | $3,000 |
| Doctors Without Borders USA | $3,000 |
| Appalachia Science in the Pub Int | $3,000 |
| Center for Hlth Environ and Justice | $2,500 |
| Oak Ridge Environ Peace Alliance | $2,500 |
| American Museum of Tort Law | $2,500 |
| Public Employees for Env Respn | $2,500 |
| Earth Island Institute | $2,000 |
| Family Farm Defenders | $2,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 40% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +44% since the first grant, against +35% for the ones you funded once.
32 repeat relationships — 26 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 2 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, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k 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
- EIESSENTIAL INFORMATION INC2× · 2022–2023 · $31k · revenue +54%
- BNBEYOND NUCLEAR5× · 2020–2024 · $29k · revenue +43%
- VFVeterans For Peace Inc4× · 2021–2024 · $25k · revenue +44%
Funded once
- NPNY Public Interest Rsch Groupone grant, 2023 · $10k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $5k
- AFAPPLESEED FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $3k · revenue +35%
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.
To advance effective law and governance systems for environmental protection by providing information, publications, training courses, seminars, research and policy recommendations in a manner that engages and empowers leaders and…
Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.
To empower frontline communities to lead nature-based solutions that advance climate justice, ecosystem restoration, and resilient livelihoods through connecting locally-led initiatives to funding, markets, and technical support.
International Rivers protects rivers and defends the rights of communities that depend on them.
Natural History Institute is organized to provide leadership and resources for a revitalized practice of natural history that integrates art, science, and humanities to promote the health and well-being of humans and the rest of the…
New Roots Institute is a nonprofit empowering the next generation with knowledge and training to end factory farming.
The Breakthrough Institute is a research center that identifies and promotes technological solutions to environmental and human development challenges.
The Corporation is organized exclusively for charitable and educational purposes. Earthworks is dedicated to protecting communities and the environment from the impacts of irresponsible mineral and energy development while seeking…
To teach and disseminate educational materials to the public.
To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with Indigenous communities in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability, and the preservation of the Amazon Basin's…
Environmental Law Foundation's (ELF) mission is to protect the environment, communities, and consumers against harmful toxics and other environmental harms. Our work consistently improves environmental quality for those most at risk by…
Grist is an independent, non profit media organization dedicated to reporting on climate change.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Indian Law Resource Center and the most unlike its peers is Work-Bites Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
17 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. 17 of the 39 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 ESSENTIAL INFORMATION INC ↗
- Who funds BEYOND NUCLEAR ↗
- Who funds Veterans For Peace Inc ↗
- Who funds WORK-BITES INC ↗
- Who funds APPALACHIA-SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC INT ↗
- Who funds Earth Island Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds OAK RIDGE ENVIRONMENTAL PEACE ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Beyond Pesticides ↗
- Who funds FAMILY FARM DEFENDERS INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds INDIAN LAW RESOURCE CENTER ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN MUSEUM TORT LAW INC ↗
- Who funds HONOR THE EARTH ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR NONPROFIT NEWS ↗
- Who funds WINCHESTER LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds APPLESEED FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds BEARDSLEY & MEMORIAL LIBRARY ↗
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: Safety Systems Foundation · Northwest Community Bank Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Public Safety Research 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Public Safety Research Institute?
Find your warmest path to Public Safety Research Institute 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.