Skip to content

· Private foundation

Rapidan 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.

$113k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

International$379kEducation$165kCommunity Improvement$82kYouth Development$82kCivil Rights$69kHealth$58kHuman Services$44kEnvironment$40kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$15,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$1.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SAN MIGUEL - CASA INC$25,000
EKVN-YEFOLECV SOCIAL AND ENVIRON$18,000
MADRE$15,000
DOCTORS FOR GLOBAL HEALTH$15,000
NURTURING MINDS INC$15,000
PONHEARY LY FOUNDATION$14,500
FAIR GIRLS INC$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 (FY19–24, $40k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, 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%EKVN-YEFOLECV: $20k → 18%HOPEESPERANZA RESTORATION & EMPOWE: $10k → 8%EKVN-YEFOLECV: $10k → 18%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

VT
NH
NY
MA
CA
MD
NC
DC
AL
GA
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 8% of Rapidan Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Rapidan Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 10% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$848k · 14 repeat orgs$106k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
7

Total granted

$848k
$73k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+35%
+208%

Still filing today

79%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 71% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $33k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalHuman ServicesEducationCivil RightsCrime & LegalArts & CultureOther
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

  • NM
    NURTURING MINDS INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $100k · revenue +243%
  • SM
    SAN MIGUEL-CASA INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $97k · revenue +59%
  • PL
    Ponheary Ly Foundation
    7× · 2017–2025 · $92k · revenue +9%

Funded once

  • SM
    SAN MIGUEL - CASA INC
    one grant, 2018 · $15k
  • HE
    Hope Esperanza Restoratn & Empwrmnt Cntrgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +263%
  • P
    PPMW
    one grant, 2017 · $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
Direct Action for Women Now World-Wide Inc Formerly Indias Daughters Inc
Philanthropy
2
Maia

MAIA is creating a generation of empowered leaders who have the knowledge and resources they need to lead choice-filled lives, break cycles of poverty, and ignite transformational change in their communities.

International
3
Womens Empowerment Coalition

To advance gender equity through education, mentorship, and economic opportunity in marginalized communities.

Civil Rights
4
Womens Centers International

Initiatives that empower women in poverty and conflict zones, expanding access to economic opportunities, education and vocational skills training, health care access, and protection from violence.

International
5
Let's Talk Womxn (Fka Msedg - Mehak Sehar Educating Girls Globally Nfp)
Education
6
Her Next Steps
Human Services
7
Global Health Promise

Advocate for and support women in sex work and their children.

Health
8
Women in Progress Inc

Women in Progress dba Global Mamas works to achieve economic independence of African women and alleviate poverty at a grassroots level by creating jobs and income generation opportunities that generate a sustainable, living wage and at the…

Community Improvement
9
Herhealtheq Corp

Delivering devices and equipment to mid-to-low income countries, to target the prevention and detection of non-communicable diseases. This is specifically focused on impacting the lives of women.

International
10
Educate Girls

Educate Girls promotes and protects the right of girls to a quality education and works by supporting partners in geographies where the need is greatest to mobilize communities, enroll girls into school and improve learning outcomes. Our…

International
11
Speak Up for the Poor

Speak Up exists to transform the world on behalf of the poor. Our mission is to create a new reality for girls in poverty. We work toward this goal through educational programs support of safe homes and practical legal work.

International
12
World Pulse Voices

World Pulse is a global social impact network connecting women from 227 countries to accelerate social change. We provide a safe and supportive online space where women can speak for themselves, make powerful connections, and access the…

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Madre Inc; the most unlike its peers is International Federation for Family Health. 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

16 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 16 of the 23 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/16
Grantees still filing
11/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NURTURING MINDS INC: $100,000 · EducationNURTURING MINDS INCSAN MIGUEL-CASA INC: $97,000 · EducationSAN MIGUEL-CASA INCFAIR GIRLS INC: $77,000 · InternationalFAIR GIRLS INCMADRE INC: $72,500 · InternationalMADRE INCDOCTORS FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC: $30,000 · InternationalDOCTORS FOR GLOBAL HEA…OMID FOUNDATION USA: $8,000 · InternationalGREEN MOUNTAIN CAMP FOR GIRLS: $66,750 · OtherGREEN MOUNTAIN CAMP FOR GIR…MUJERES EN CAMBIO AC: $24,000 · OtherMUJERES EN CAMBIO ACEKVN-YEFOLECV SOCIAL AND ENVIRON: $18,000 · OtherEKVN-YEFOLECV SOCIAL AND EN…SAN MIGUEL - CASA INC: $15,000 · OtherSAN MIGUEL - CASA INCMADRE: $15,000 · OtherMADREINTERNATIONAL FEDERATION FOR FAMILY HEALTH: $15,000 · OtherINTERNATIONAL FEDERATION FO…PPMW: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherMY SISTER'S PLACE INC: $10,000 · OtherAMARA LEGAL CENTER: $35,000 · OtherAMARA LEGAL CENTERWEAVING EARTH INC: $10,000 · OtherPonheary Ly Foundation: $91,900 · Human ServicesPonheary Ly Fou…EKVNV YEFOLECVLKE: $30,000 · Human ServicesEKVNV YEFOLECVL…Hope Esperanza Restoratn & Empwrmnt Cntr: $10,000 · Human ServicesHope Esperanza …Prospera Community Development: $82,000 · EmploymentProspera …GLOBAL GRASSROOTS: $69,000 · Civil RightsTEACH INC: $58,000 · Arts & Culture
Education$197,000International$187,500Other$228,750Human Services$131,900Employment$82,000Civil Rights$69,000Arts & Culture$58,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNURTURING MINDS INC: $100,000 over 8y, 0.9% of budgetSAN MIGUEL-CASA INC: $97,000 over 5y, 6.2% of budgetPonheary Ly Foundation: $91,900 over 7y, 2.5% of budgetProspera Community Development: $82,000 over 6y, 5.1% of budgetFAIR GIRLS INC: $77,000 over 6y, 2.0% of budgetMADRE INC: $72,500 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetGLOBAL GRASSROOTS: $69,000 over 5y, 5.7% of budgetTEACH INC: $58,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetAMARA LEGAL CENTER: $35,000 over 3y, 2.2% of budgetDOCTORS FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC: $30,000 over 2y, 3.3% of budgetEKVNV YEFOLECVLKE: $30,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetINTERNATIONAL FEDERATION FOR FAMILY HEALTH: $15,000 over 2y, 68% of budgetMY SISTER'S PLACE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetWEAVING EARTH INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetOMID FOUNDATION USA: $8,000 over 1y, 1.1% 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 NURTURING MINDS INC ↗
  • Who funds SAN MIGUEL-CASA INC ↗
  • Who funds Ponheary Ly Foundation ↗
  • Who funds Prospera Community Development ↗
  • Who funds FAIR GIRLS INC ↗
  • Who funds MADRE INC ↗
  • Who funds GLOBAL GRASSROOTS ↗
  • Who funds TEACH INC ↗
  • Who funds AMARA LEGAL CENTER ↗
  • Who funds DOCTORS FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC ↗
  • Who funds EKVNV YEFOLECVLKE ↗
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION FOR FAMILY HEALTH ↗
  • Who funds Hope Esperanza Restoratn & Empwrmnt Cntr ↗
  • Who funds MY SISTER'S PLACE INC ↗
  • Who funds WEAVING EARTH INC ↗
  • Who funds OMID FOUNDATION USA ↗

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.

Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA14.1× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Novo Foundation · Tides Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 23 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 Rapidan’s filings →

    More from the funding graph