Skip to content
Renova International Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Renova International Foundation

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.

$41k
Granted FY2023
4
Grants FY2023
3
States reached
$22k
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, FY2017 to 2023.

Employment$175kReligion$100kEnvironment$78kInternational$56kHuman Services$28kAnimals$22kPublic Safety & Disaster$7kEducation$5k
02FY2023 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k3 grants · $19k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $22k
$8,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$590k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Asia Connect$21,957
Water for Life International$8,000
Trauma Intervention Programs$7,000
Kilimanjaro Mission of Hope and Out$3,645
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 (FY18–22, $177k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Starfish Project: $80k → 13%Starfish Project: $40k → 13%Starfish Project: $30k → 13%Canine Companions: $2k → 11%Starfish Project: $25k → 13%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

ID
IL
NY
OR
IN
PA
CA
CO
AZ
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 5% of Renova International Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Renova International Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 5.3% 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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$395k · 7 repeat orgs$75k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +43% since the first grant, against +26% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2023, 5 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
10

Total granted

$395k
$64k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%
+26%

Still filing today

57%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $11k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
Human ServicesReligionEducationEnvironmentInternationalOther
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

  • SP
    Starfish Project Incorporated
    4× · 2018–2022 · $175k · revenue +203%
  • CS
    COFAN SURVIVAL FUND INC
    3× · 2020–2022 · $65k · revenue +97%
  • IS
    INTERNATIONAL SERVICE FELLOWSHIP
    2× · 2017–2021 · $15k · revenue +43%

Funded once

  • AS
    AMNA SANCTUARY
    one grant, 2022 · $20k · revenue -94% · 28% of their budget
  • GR
    GLOBAL RESOURCE GROUP INCORPORATED
    one grant, 2019 · $13k
  • KF
    KMHO Family Wells Project
    one grant, 2022 · $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
Institute of Chinese Studies

ChinsSource is a trusted partner and platform for educating the global church on critical issues facing the church and ministries in China and for connecting Christians inside and outside China to advance the kingdom of God globally

International
2
Xingu Mission

Religious, charitable and educational missionary work in the Amazon River basin in Brazil

Religion
3
Christian Mission to the Orient

The organization is a missionary sending/sponsoring organizations that engage in Christian evangelism and training leaders for the churches in SE Asia

—
4
Asia Us Impact

Religious

Religion
5
Christianity Today International

Christianity Today is a global community inspired by evangelical conviction to advance the stories and ideas of the kingdom of God. Our mission is to elevate the storytellers and sages of the global church.

Religion
6
Equip Ministries International

Equip ministries trains overseas pastors and leaders, empowers the church, provides humanitarian aid, and attempts to reach the unreached peoples around the world by working with church leaders to fulfil

Religion
7
Eden Ministry

Eden Ministry seeks to advocate for trafficked victims in Asia to reach rescue and restore them from exploitation

Religion
8
Timothy Two Project International

Reaching and teaching pastors in the majority world.

Religion
9
Ivory Coast Christian Mission

train church leaders and planting churches outside USA

Religion
10
Jesus in Vietnam Ministries
Religion
11
Radio Encounter International

Christian broadcasting, Building of low power transmitters, Distribution of solar power radio receivers.

—
12
Adventive Cross Cultural Initiatives

ACCI serves pioneering Christians, empowering them to proclaim the gospel, fulfill their God-given visions, and advance the kingdom of God. ACCI longs for a world where lives are transformed through the Holy Spirit, where new disciples are…

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is International Service Fellowship; the most unlike its peers is Amna Sanctuary. 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 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. 10 of the 19 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Starfish Project Incorporated: $175,000 · Human ServicesStarfish Project Incorporated+1 more: $2,000 · Human ServicesAFRICA INLAND MISSION INTERNATIONAL INCORPORATED: $67,115 · OtherAFRICA INLAND MISSION INTERNATIONAL INCOR…WATER FOR LIFE INTERNATIONAL INC: $25,000 · OtherWATER FOR LIFE INTERNATIONAL INCIndividual grant recipient: $23,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientINTERNATIONAL SERVICE FELLOWSHIP: $15,000 · OtherINTERNATIONAL SERVICE FELLOWSHIPGLOBAL RESOURCE GROUP INCORPORATED: $12,883 · OtherGLOBAL RESOURCE GROUP INCORPORATEDKMHO Family Wells Project: $10,000 · OtherKMHO Family Wells ProjectTrauma Intervention Programs: $7,000 · Other+4 more: $12,450 · Other+4 moreCOFAN SURVIVAL FUND INC: $65,000 · EnvironmentCOFAN SURVIVAL …Asia Connect: $24,957 · ReligionFREEDOM ENCOUNTERS INC: $2,000 · ReligionAMNA SANCTUARY: $20,000 · EducationKILIMANJARO MISSION OF HOPE & OUTREACH: $3,645 · EducationENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTITUTE IN CHINA: $5,100 · International
Human Services$177,000Other$172,448Environment$65,000Religion$26,957Education$23,645International$5,100

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 budgetStarfish Project Incorporated: $175,000 over 4y, 3.7% of budgetCOFAN SURVIVAL FUND INC: $65,000 over 3y, 18% of budgetAsia Connect: $24,957 over 2y, 5.9% of budgetAMNA SANCTUARY: $20,000 over 1y, 28% of budgetINTERNATIONAL SERVICE FELLOWSHIP: $15,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTITUTE IN CHINA: $5,100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKILIMANJARO MISSION OF HOPE & OUTREACH: $3,645 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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 Starfish Project Incorporated ↗
  • Who funds COFAN SURVIVAL FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds WATER FOR LIFE INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
  • Who funds Asia Connect ↗
  • Who funds AMNA SANCTUARY ↗
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL SERVICE FELLOWSHIP ↗
  • Who funds ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTITUTE IN CHINA ↗
  • Who funds KILIMANJARO MISSION OF HOPE & OUTREACH ↗
  • Who funds FREEDOM ENCOUNTERS INC ↗
  • Who funds CANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC ↗

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.

Natl Christian Charit…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Natl Christian Charitable Fdn IncGA8.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 19 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record but names no grant recipient in the published copy, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Renova International’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