Skip to content
Reproductive Freedom for All Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Reproductive Freedom for All Foundation

REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION's mission is to develop and sustain a constituency that uses the political process to guarantee every woman the right to make personal decisions regarding the full range of reproductive choices, including preventing unintended pregnancy, bearing healthy children, and choosing legal abortion.

$4.0M
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$732k
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 2024.

Civil Rights$2.3MPublic Benefit$1.3MArts & Culture$601kHealth$427kEducation$250kScience & Tech$225kHuman Services$189kPhilanthropy$185kOther$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 11 grants below total $3,518,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $4,023,572 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $505,572 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $35k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $516k
  • $250k+5 grants · $3.0M
$183,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$47M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATIONAL LATINA INST FOR REPROD JUSTICE$732,000
IN OUR OWN NATIONAL BLACK WOMEN'S$700,000
UNITE FOR REPROD AND GENDER EQUITY$685,000
NAPAWF$600,000
WOMEN'S MARCH NETWORK$250,000
GLOBAL IMPACT$183,000
NCJW$150,000
FAMILY PLANNING ASSOC OF MAINE INC$108,000
NEO PHILAN INC$75,000
LDRSHP CENTER FOR ATTORNEY GEN ST$25,000
CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS$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 (FY17–24, $549k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 80% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%The Anika Foundation: $25k → 11%NARAL Pro-Choice MO Foundation: $64k → 21%NARAL Pro-Choice NC Foundation: $43k → 11%SISTER SONG INC (2): $200k → 13%NARAL Pro-Choice MO Foundation: $50k → 21%NARAL Pro-Choice NC Foundation: $25k → 11%NARAL Pro-Choice MO Foundation: $32k → 21%NARAL Pro-Choice NC Foundation: $19k → 11%NARAL Pro-Choice MO Foundation: $27k → 21%NARAL Pro-Choice MO Foundation: $14k → 21%The Gathering for Justice: $50k → 17%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

WA
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
SD
OH
CT
CA
CO
MO
VA
MD
KS
TN
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

60%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.6M · 22 repeat orgs$3.0M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +33% since the first grant, against +7% for those funded once.

22 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 17 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
22

Total granted

$4.6M
$1.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+33%
+7%

Still filing today

95%
77%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 42% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.9M 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
Civil RightsHuman ServicesHealthArts & CultureEducationPublic BenefitOther
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

  • NA
    NATIONAL ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN WOMEN'S FORUM
    2× · 2022–2025 · $700k · revenue +33%
  • TA
    THE AMERICAN INDEPENDENT FOUNDATION
    2× · 2019–2020 · $535k · revenue ×44 · 27% of their budget
  • RE
    REPRODUCTIVE EQUITY NOW FOUNDATION INC
    5× · 2017–2021 · $249k · revenue +1000%

Funded once

  • MM
    MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA
    one grant, 2020 · $250k · revenue +21%
  • PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC
    one grant, 2022 · $200k · revenue -10%
  • MF
    Missourians for Constitutional Freedom
    one grant, 2024 · $115k
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
Pro-Choice Washington

To protect and promote every persons right to access the full range of reproductive healthcare choices in Washington State, including safe and legal abortion, through education, advocacy, lobbying and coalition-building

—
2
Pro-Choice Arizona

Pro-Choice Arizona centers abolition and reproductive justice values to prioritize community needs. We advance reproductive equity, pregnancy and family justice, and abortion access for all folks living in Arizona through direct service…

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
National Network of Abortion Funds Inc

The national network of abortion funds (nnaf) is determined to build a world where all reproductive options are valued, accessible, and stigma-free. we believe all people know how to best care for their own bodies and build their own…

Environment
5
Pro Choice Virginia

Repro rising virginia is a bold, effective, and trusted leader in the political fight for reproductive freedom in virginia. we advocate for laws and policies that guarantee the right to bodily autonomy, including access to abortion care…

Civil Rights
6
Abortion Forward

Abortion forward is committed to developing and sustaining a constituency that uses the political process to guarantee every ohioan the right to make personal decisions regarding a full range of reproductive choices, including legal…

—
7
Forward Together

Forward Together is a national reproductive justice organization that centers people, families, and communities who experience reproductive oppression. They prioritize queer, trans, Black, Indigenous, and other peoples of color and utilize…

Health
8
Pro-Choice Minnesota

To develop and sustain a constituency that uses the political process to guarantee women the right to make personal decisions regarding the full range of reproductive choices.

—
9
The Conversationalist
—
10
Reproductive Freedom for All Foundation

Reproductive freedom for all foundation's mission is to develop and sustain a constituency that uses the political process to guarantee every woman the right to make personal decisions regarding the full range of reproductive choices,…

—
11
Dc Abortion Fund

The DC Abortion Fund helps pay for the abortion care of anyone living in or traveling to the DC Metro region, without restrictions or requirements. DC is a vital access point for the entire East Coast,

Human Services
12
Women's Law Project

Women's law project creates a more just and equitable society by advancing the rights and status of all women throughout their lives. to this end, we engage in high-impact litigation, advocacy, and education. the core values of women's law…

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Reproductive Equity Now Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Womensmarchla Foundation. 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

49 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. 49 of the 53 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.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
15
Early backer (in before they grew)
46/49
Grantees still filing
25/49
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

URGE UNITE FOR REPRODUCTIVE & GENDER EQUITY: $885,000 · Civil RightsURGE UNITE FOR REPRODUCTIVE & G…NATIONAL ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN WOMEN'S FORUM: $700,000 · Civil RightsNATIONAL ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN…REPRODUCTIVE EQUITY NOW FOUNDATION INC: $249,294 · Civil RightsREPRODUCTIVE EQUITY NOW FOUNDAT…Pro-Choice Washington Foundation: $232,806 · Civil RightsPro-Choice Washington Foundatio…COBALT FOUNDATION: $115,000 · Civil Rights+9 more: $316,746 · Civil Rights+9 moreTHE AMERICAN INDEPENDENT FOUNDATION: $535,000 · OtherTHE AMERICAN INDEPENDENT FOUNDAT…Womens March Network: $250,000 · OtherWomens March NetworkPRO-CHOICE MINNESOTA FOUNDATION: $223,122 · OtherPRO-CHOICE MINNESOTA FOUNDATIONPRO-CHOICE OREGON FOUNDATION: $172,217 · OtherPRO-CHOICE OREGON FOUNDATIONMissourians for Constitutional Freedom: $115,000 · OtherKANSANS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOM INC: $100,000 · OtherNEO Philanthropy Inc: $275,000 · OtherNEO Philanthropy IncMEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA: $250,000 · OtherMEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICAGlobal Impact: $183,000 · OtherGlobal ImpactNATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN INCORPORATED: $150,000 · OtherNATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN…+12 more: $364,771 · Other+12 moreNATIONAL LATINA INSTITUTE FOR REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE: $732,000 · HealthNATIONAL LATIN…PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $200,000 · HealthPLANNED PARENT…PRO-CHOICE VIRGINIA FOUNDATION: $127,984 · HealthPRO-CHOICE VIR…FAMILY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF MAINE INC: $108,000 · HealthFAMILY PLANNIN…+1 more: $10,000 · HealthHOPEWELL FUND: $1,050,000 · PhilanthropyHOPEWELL FUNDAmalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc: $110,000 · PhilanthropyAmalgamated Ch…IN OUR OWN VOICE NATIONAL BLACK WOMEN'S REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE AGENDA: $700,000 · Crime & LegalSISTERSONG INC: $210,000 · Human ServicesAbortion Action Missouri Foundation: $187,196 · Human ServicesPRO-CHOICE NC FOUNDATION: $87,005 · Human ServicesTHE GATHERING FOR JUSTICE INC: $50,000 · Human ServicesTIDES CENTER: $25,000 · Human ServicesTHE ANIKA FOUNDATION: $25,000 · Human ServicesThe Reimagination Lab Inc: $225,000 · Arts & CultureNARAL Pro-Choice Maryland Fund Inc: $65,593 · Arts & Culture+1 more: $10,000 · Arts & Culture
Civil Rights$2,498,846Other$2,618,110Health$1,177,984Philanthropy$1,160,000Crime & Legal$700,000Human Services$584,201Arts & Culture$300,593

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHOPEWELL FUND: $1,050,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetURGE UNITE FOR REPRODUCTIVE & GENDER EQUITY: $885,000 over 2y, 2.7% of budgetNATIONAL LATINA INSTITUTE FOR REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE: $732,000 over 1y, 10.0% of budgetNATIONAL ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN WOMEN'S FORUM: $700,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetTHE AMERICAN INDEPENDENT FOUNDATION: $535,000 over 2y, 27% of budgetNEO Philanthropy Inc: $275,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA: $250,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetREPRODUCTIVE EQUITY NOW FOUNDATION INC: $249,294 over 5y, 17% of budgetPro-Choice Washington Foundation: $232,806 over 5y, 17% of budgetThe Reimagination Lab Inc: $225,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetPRO-CHOICE MINNESOTA FOUNDATION: $223,122 over 3y, 78% of budgetSISTERSONG INC: $210,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $200,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAbortion Action Missouri Foundation: $187,196 over 4y, 42% of budgetGlobal Impact: $183,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPRO-CHOICE OREGON FOUNDATION: $172,217 over 5y, 13% of budgetNATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN INCORPORATED: $150,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetPRO-CHOICE VIRGINIA FOUNDATION: $127,984 over 3y, 24% of budgetCOBALT FOUNDATION: $115,000 over 2y, 6.7% of budgetMissourians for Constitutional Freedom: $115,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetAmalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc: $110,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFAMILY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF MAINE INC: $108,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetPRO-CHOICE NC FOUNDATION: $87,005 over 2y, 21% of budgetABORTION FORWARD ALLIANCE: $81,746 over 2y, 6.1% of budgetNARAL Pro-Choice Maryland Fund Inc: $65,593 over 2y, 11% of budgetCONGRESSIONAL HISPANIC CAUCUS INSTITUTE INC: $65,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetPRO-CHOICE CONNECTICUT FOUNDATION INC: $51,958 over 2y, 89% of budgetTHE LEADERSHIP CENTER FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL STUDIES: $50,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetWomens March Inc: $50,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetTHE GATHERING FOR JUSTICE INC: $50,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetYellowhammer Fund: $40,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetPRO-CHOICE CONNECTICUT INC: $38,000 over 2y, 33% of budgetCONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS FOUNDATION INC: $30,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSPARK REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE NOW: $25,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetCONGRESSIONAL PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS CENTER: $25,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetTHE ANIKA FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 7.2% of budgetHigher Heights Leadership Fund: $25,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetNEW GEORGIA PROJECT INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPODER: $25,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetMOTHERING JUSTICE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetPOWER RISING: $20,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetAvow Foundation for Abortion Access: $15,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetMemphis Center For Reproductive Health Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWOMENSMARCHLA FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetBIRTH IN COLOR RVA FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% 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.

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.

Hopewell FundThe Susan Thompson Bu…Reproductive Freedom …New Venture FundPlanned Parenthood Fe…National Institute fo…Abortion Forward Alli…Amalgamated Charitabl…Ms Foundation for Wom…Rockefeller Philanthr…The William & Flora H…Tides Foundation
Hopewell FundDC44.6× affinity20 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Hopewell Fund · The Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation · Reproductive Freedom for All · New Venture Fund · Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc · National Institute for Reproductive Health Inc · Abortion Forward Alliance · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Ms Foundation for Women Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Tides 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 Reproductive Freedom for All Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Reproductive Freedom for All Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get 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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 53 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 Reproductive Freedom for All’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