Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

Rethink Charity

RETHINK CHARITY's mission is to encourage effective altruism by creating initiatives that facilitate interpersonal engagement with the objective of exposing the wider public to altruism projects and energizing those already involved.

$1.2M
Granted FY2023
11
Grants FY2023
5
States reached
$527k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2023.

Science & Tech$2.1MAnimals$1.5MInternational$1.4MPhilanthropy$1.3MHuman Services$801kFood & Nutrition$534kEducation$508kEnvironment$395kOther$0
02FY2023 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 11 grants below total $1,136,502 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,232,267 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $95,765 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k4 grants · $28k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $122k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $139k
  • $250k+2 grants · $847k
$28,564
Median grant
5
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NONLINEAR INC$527,325
TSINGHUA EDUCATION FOUNDATION$320,000
MALARIA CONSORTIUM US$138,794
CENTRE FOR EFFECTIVE ALTRUISM US$45,555
SECUREBIO INC$36,922
ANIMAL CHARITY EVALUATORS$28,564
VIDA PLENA$11,027
RETHINK PRIORITIES$8,285
ANIMAL ETHICS$7,386
ALLFED INSTITUTES$7,352
EVERY ORG$5,292
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY19–23, $1.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Rethink Priorities: $1.2M → 10%RETHINK PRIORITIES: $50k → 10%RETHINK PRIORITIES: $8k → 10%GivePower Foundation: $23k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

MN
NY
MA
IN
NJ
CT
CA
CO
MD
NC
DC

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

77%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$6.7M · 23 repeat orgs$2.0M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +47% since the first grant, against -7% for the ones you funded once.

23 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2023, 17 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

23
13

Total granted

$6.7M
$1.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+47%
-7%

Still filing today

83%
92%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $377k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23
InternationalAnimalsHealthHuman ServicesEnvironmentPhilanthropyOther

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

  • RP
    Rethink Priorities
    3× · 2020–2023 · $1.3M · revenue +851% · 55% of their budget
  • GIVEDIRECTLY INC
    3× · 2019–2021 · $801k · revenue +358%
  • TH
    THE HUMANE LEAGUE
    3× · 2019–2021 · $596k · revenue +110%

Funded once

  • ST
    Speculative Technologies Inc
    one grant, 2022 · $925k · revenue -7% · 79% of their budget
  • NI
    NONLINEAR INC
    one grant, 2022 · $253k · revenue -89% · 41% of their budget
  • AF
    ASSOCIATION FOR HEALTH LEARNING AND INFERENCE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $188k · revenue +939%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
2
Climate Catalyst Inc

Climate catalyst sparks collective action to tackle the biggest climate challenges we face today: cutting emissions in heavy industries.

Environment
3
E3G Third Generation Environmentalism

E3g is a leading international not-for-profit think tank specialising in climate diplomacy harnessing expertise in the politics and economics of climate change.

Environment
4
Legal Advocates for Safe Science and Technology Inc

Using legal advocacy to make advances in science and technology safer for people and the planet.

Science & Tech
5
Safe Artificial Intelligence Forum Institute

To drive global coordination that minimizes extreme AI risks and ensures the benefits of AI are shared by all. SAIF fosters responsible governance to reduce catastrophic risks through shared understanding and collaboration among key global…

—
6
Accion International

Our mission is to create a fair and inclusive economy where underserved people have quality financial choices and opportunities to improve their economic well-being. we find and help build innovative companies with the potential to reach…

International
7
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
8
Well Aware Inc

Well Aware's mission is to provide innovative and sustainable solutions to water scarcity and contamination in East Africa.

International
9
Climate Breakthrough Inc

To launch breakthrough climate mitigation efforts by identifying, supporting, and unleashing innovative leaders with transformative strategies.

Human Services
10
Conservation X Labs Inc

To improve the efficacy, speed, cost, sustainability, and scaling of conservation solutions through harnessing exponential technology, innovation, and entrepreneurship to prevent human-induced extinction.

Animals
11
Fajr Scientific

To provide multi-specialty surgical care, humanitarian aid and educational support to people in low- and middle-income countries.

Science & Tech
12
Eden Peopleplanet

To offer the dignity of fair employment to people living in impoverished communities, who become transformational agents of global forest restoration.

International

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Evidence Action and the most unlike its peers is Every Org. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyLocal Food System Organizat…Environmental Conservation …Policy Research and AdvocacyYouth Sports ProgramsAnimal Rescue and Shelter
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 13 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%21%<5yr14%9%5–10yr19%44%10–20yr16%24%20–35yr13%0%35–55yr16%3%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%25%<5yr14%22%5–10yr19%41%10–20yr16%11%20–35yr13%0%35–55yr16%1%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 21% of your grantees by number, and just 25% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
2%1/42
the rest of the field
13%
240,395/1,819,523

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.

04the grantee network

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

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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 37 of the 42 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
37/37
Grantees still filing
24/37
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Rethink Priorities — $1,258,285 · Human ServicesRethink PrioritiesGIVEDIRECTLY INC — $801,258 · Human ServicesGIVEDIRECTLY INC+1 more — $22,883 · Human ServicesNONLINEAR INC — $780,575 · OtherNONLINEAR INCLEAD FOR FARMED ANIMALS — $477,980 · OtherLEAD FOR FARMED ANIMALSGENUNITY — $180,723 · OtherGENUNITYTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC — $521,661 · OtherTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INCCOALITION FOR RAINFOREST NATIONS SECRETARIAT — $152,753 · OtherNONLINEAR INC — $253,250 · OtherNONLINEAR INCPLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND INC — $107,554 · Other+10 more — $426,461 · Other+10 moreTHE HUMANE LEAGUE — $595,711 · AnimalsTHE HUMANE LE…Animal Equality — $183,303 · AnimalsAnimal Equali…ANIMAL CHARITY EVALUATORS — $164,630 · AnimalsANIMAL CHARIT…MERCY FOR ANIMALS INC — $42,045 · Animals+2 more — $31,499 · AnimalsSpeculative Technologies Inc — $925,013 · Science & TechSpeculative …SECUREBIO INC — $36,922 · Science & Tech+1 more — $7,076 · Science & TechTSINGHUA EDUCATION FOUNDATION NA INC — $320,000 · InternationalTSINGHUA …EVIDENCE ACTION — $261,960 · InternationalEVIDENCE …NEW INCENTIVES — $80,678 · InternationalNEW INCEN…HELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL — $45,260 · InternationalHELEN KEL…+3 more — $27,494 · InternationalEFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUNDATION USA INC — $423,418 · EducationASSOCIATION FOR HEALTH LEARNING AND INFERENCE INC — $187,530 · EducationMALARIA CONSORTIUM US INC — $349,820 · HealthThe Fistula Foundation — $105,222 · HealthVida Plena — $61,027 · Health+1 more — $14,910 · Health
Human Services$2,082,426Other$2,900,957Animals$1,017,188Science & Tech$969,011International$735,392Education$610,948Health$530,979

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetRethink Priorities — $1,258,285 over 3y, 55% of budgetSpeculative Technologies Inc — $925,013 over 1y, 79% of budgetGIVEDIRECTLY INC — $801,258 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetTHE HUMANE LEAGUE — $595,711 over 3y, 2.6% of budgetTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC — $521,661 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetEFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUNDATION USA INC — $423,418 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetMALARIA CONSORTIUM US INC — $349,820 over 4y, 7.5% of budgetTSINGHUA EDUCATION FOUNDATION NA INC — $320,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetEVIDENCE ACTION — $261,960 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetNONLINEAR INC — $253,250 over 1y, 41% of budgetAnimal Equality — $183,303 over 3y, 2.7% of budgetANIMAL CHARITY EVALUATORS — $164,630 over 3y, 1.6% of budgetCOALITION FOR RAINFOREST NATIONS SECRETARIAT — $152,753 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetPLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND INC — $107,554 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetThe Fistula Foundation — $105,222 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetCOOL EARTH ACTION USA INC — $83,890 over 3y, 3.9% of budgetNEW INCENTIVES — $80,678 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetMeridian Institute — $70,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC — $65,625 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetTHE CLEAR FUND — $63,164 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetVida Plena — $61,027 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetHELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL — $45,260 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMERCY FOR ANIMALS INC — $42,045 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSECUREBIO INC — $36,922 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetWILD ANIMAL INITIATIVE INC — $24,113 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetGIVEPOWER FOUNDATION — $22,883 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSIGHTSAVERS INC — $14,910 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLIVING GOODS — $12,968 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLEVERAGE RESEARCH INC — $10,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetTIME DOLLAR INSTITUTE INC — $9,424 over 1y, 6.9% of budgetSTRONGMINDS INC — $9,242 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetANIMAL ETHICS INC — $7,386 over 1y, 4.2% of budgetALLFED INSTITUTE — $7,352 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMACHINE INTELLIGENCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC — $7,076 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEVERY ORG — $5,292 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPROJECT HEALTHY CHILDREN INC — $5,284 over 1y, 0.2% of budget
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.

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.

Effective Ventures Fo…Founders Pledge IncGood Ventures Foundat…Silicon Valley Commun…Every OrgBerkeley Existential …Humane America Animal…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Daffy Charitable FundRsf Social Finance IncDouble Up Drive IncKh Dominion Foundatio…
Effective Ventures Foundation USA IncCA30.4× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Effective Ventures Foundation USA Inc · Founders Pledge Inc · Good Ventures Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Every Org · Berkeley Existential Risk Initiative · Humane America Animal Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Daffy Charitable Fund · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Double Up Drive Inc · Kh Dominion Foundation 5507-21-40

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 Rethink Charity 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 100%6%23%51%90%your share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    10get 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 · 0–75%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Rethink Charity?

    Find your warmest path to Rethink Charity 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 42 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    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 camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home
    State money flows
    the interactive map of money crossing state lines