Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Public charity

Rf Catalytic Capital Inc

Providing visionary solutions through partnerships with like-minded funders to (see schedule o) improve the lives of vulnerable people around the world

$118M
Granted FY2024still arriving
105
Grants FY2024still arriving
25
States reached
$15M
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 FY2021–2024.

Environment$99MInternational$48MHealth$27MFood & Nutrition$16MPhilanthropy$14MEmployment$11MCommunity Improvement$8.6MPublic Benefit$7.6MOther$0
02FY2024 · 105 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $50k–250k5 grants · $557k
  • $250k+100 grants · $124M
$800,000
Median grant
25
States reached
$269M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE WORLD BANK$15,000,000
JUSTICE CLIMATE FUND$4,000,000
PUERTO RICO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC$4,000,000
GLOBAL IMPACT$3,880,000
PACT$3,879,232
COALITION FOR GREEN CAPITAL$3,264,704
CLIMATE AND CLEAN ENERGY EQUITY FUND$2,500,000
WINDWARD FUND$2,500,000
ALLIANCE FOR TRIBAL CLEAN ENERGY$2,500,000
FARM-TO-POWER INC$2,400,000
FAIR SHOT TEXAS$2,000,000
LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND$2,000,000
AMALGAMATED CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC$2,000,000
WINDWARD FUND$2,000,000
ACUMEN FUND INC$1,875,000
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 (FY23–24, $1.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%WORKMONEY FOUNDATION INC: $500k → 17%GLOBAL RESILIENT CITIES NETWORK: $800k → 17%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

VT
WA
MT
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
NV
WY
SD
OH
PA
CT
RI
CA
CO
VA
MD
AZ
NM
TN
NC
DC
AL
GA
TX

Grants abroad, by region — $33M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 4 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

East Asia and the Pacific$16M · 49% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

Sub-Saharan Africa$16M · 47% · 7 grants

Stated purpose: TO SUPPORT CAPACITY BUILDING · TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

Central America and the Caribbean$769k · 2% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE · TO SUPPORT CAPACITY BUILDING

South Asia$621k · 2% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: TO SUPPORT CAPACITY BUILDING · TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.

04

Where the work is directed

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

About 9% of Rf Catalytic Capital Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.

Rf Catalytic Capital Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 5.1% directed abroad (not shown)

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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

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.

62%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$133M · 21 repeat orgs$83M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +33% since the first grant, against -2% for the ones you funded once.

21 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 69 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
21

Total granted

$133M
$18M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+33%
-2%

Still filing today

86%
81%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 39% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $65M went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentCommunity ImprovementEducationInternationalPublic BenefitScience & TechOther

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

  • WB
    WORLD BANK GROUP STAFF ASSOCIATION
    2× · 2022–2024 · $30M · revenue +33%
  • AH
    American Heart Association Inc
    4× · 2021–2024 · $15M · revenue +33%
  • Rocky Mountain Institute
    3× · 2022–2024 · $7.4M · revenue +50%

Funded once

  • CP
    CLIMATE POWER EDUCATION FUND
    one grant, 2023 · $4.0M · 34% of their budget
  • COMMUNITY INITIATIVESgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $2.0M · revenue +46%
  • CF
    Clean Future Forum Incgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $2.0M · revenue +247%

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
Climate Access Fund Corporation

The Climate Access Fund develops and finances community solar products that serve low to moderate income households

Environment
2
Climate Foundation

To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.

Science & Tech
3
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
4
Climate Catalyst Inc

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

Environment
5
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
6
Clean Energy Group Inc

Clean energy research and advocacy. Clean Energy Group promotes effective clean energy policies, develops low carbon technology innovation strategies and promotes new financial tools to strengthen the economy and stabilize climate change.

Environment
7
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
8
Common Future

Common future is a network of pioneering leaders across the u.s. and canada who work deeply within their communities to create alternative approaches to business, philanthropy, and investing. we envision an economy that has transitioned…

Community Improvement
9
Climate Leadership Council Inc

To develop and promote a carbon dividends framework - based on carbon fees whose revenues are rebated to citizens through dividends - as the most cost-effective, equitable, and politically viable climate solution.

Environment
10
California Clean Energy Fund

The california clean energy fund supports entrepreneurs to drive innovation and build equity into the clean economy.

Environment
11
Environment Next Inc

Environment next supports individuals, nonprofits and businesses around the world on solutions to complex climate issues. we provide leadership, outreach and communication support, grants, and investments to empower leaders and their ideas…

Environment
12
Climate Breakthrough Inc

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

Human Services

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Climate Power Education Fund and the most unlike its peers is Justice Climate Fund Inc. 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 backsteadyEnvironmental Conservation …Affordable Housing Developm…Independent K-12 SchoolsFaith-Based Liberal Arts Co…Policy Research and AdvocacyCommunity Foundations
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 15 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%21%<5yr14%16%5–10yr19%21%10–20yr16%23%20–35yr13%13%35–55yr16%8%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%20%<5yr14%17%5–10yr19%15%10–20yr16%19%20–35yr13%14%35–55yr16%15%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 21% of your grantees by number, and just 20% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/121
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,444

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.

05the grantee network

110 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. 110 of the 121 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.

23
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
110/110
Grantees still filing
34/110
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

WORLD BANK GROUP STAFF ASSOCIATION — $30,000,000 · OtherWORLD BANK GROUP STAFF ASSOCIATIONIHEALTH LABS INC — $22,586,627 · OtherIHEALTH LABS INCRocky Mountain Institute — $7,375,524 · OtherRocky Mountain InstituteFACTORE VENTURES PBC — $3,775,786 · Other+38 more — $29,611,772 · Other+38 moreWINDWARD FUND — $7,000,000 · EnvironmentWINDWARD FUNDCLASP — $6,500,000 · EnvironmentCLASPCLIMATE AND CLEAN ENERGY EQUITY FUND — $5,000,000 · EnvironmentCLIMATE AND CLEAN ENERGY EQUITY F…CLIMATE POWER EDUCATION FUND — $4,000,000 · EnvironmentCLIMATE POWER EDUCATION FUNDJUSTICE CLIMATE FUND INC — $4,000,000 · EnvironmentJUSTICE CLIMATE FUND INCLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND — $4,000,000 · EnvironmentLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDU…ALLIANCE FOR TRIBAL CLEAN ENERGY INC — $4,000,000 · EnvironmentALLIANCE FOR TRIBAL CLEAN ENERGY …CLIMATE JOBS NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER INC — $3,500,000 · EnvironmentCOALITION FOR GREEN CAPITAL D/B/A AMERICAN GREEN BANK CONSORTIUM — $3,264,704 · EnvironmentWESTERN CONSERVATION FOUNDATION — $3,000,000 · Environment+27 more — $25,744,500 · Environment+27 moreUNITED STATES ENERGY FOUNDATION — $7,100,000 · PhilanthropyUNITED STA…Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc — $5,350,000 · PhilanthropyAmalgamate…PUERTO RICO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC — $4,000,000 · PhilanthropyPUERTO RIC…COMMUNITY INITIATIVES — $2,000,000 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY …APPALACHIAN COMMUNITY CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION — $1,053,000 · PhilanthropyROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC — $1,000,000 · PhilanthropyCLEAN POWER INSTITUTE — $1,000,000 · PhilanthropyMARIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $1,000,000 · Philanthropy+1 more — $600,000 · PhilanthropyAmerican Heart Association Inc — $15,244,036 · HealthCOMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER CAPITAL FUND INC — $1,300,000 · Health+1 more — $499,398 · HealthPACT INC — $7,147,546 · InternationalGlobal Impact — $3,880,000 · InternationalACUMEN FUND INC — $1,875,000 · InternationalCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC — $1,057,259 · InternationalUNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INC — $1,000,000 · International+2 more — $466,545 · InternationalGREAT PLAINS INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT INC — $3,500,000 · Community ImprovementLAWYERS FOR GOOD GOVERNMENT INC — $2,500,000 · Community ImprovementTHE GREENLINING INSTITUTE — $1,500,000 · Community ImprovementCENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE — $1,250,000 · Community ImprovementSOUTHEAST SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS — $1,143,000 · Community ImprovementWESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS EDUCATION PROJECT — $800,000 · Community ImprovementTEXAS ORGANIZING PROJECT EDUCATION FUND — $650,000 · Community ImprovementMIDWEST TRIBAL ENERGY RESOURCES ASSOCIATION INC — $550,000 · Community ImprovementCOMMON GROUND INC — $500,000 · Community ImprovementGROWTH OPPORTUNITY PARTNERS INC — $500,000 · Community ImprovementTHE CAPITAL GOOD FUND — $500,000 · Community Improvement+2 more — $550,000 · Community ImprovementForward Together Wisconsin — $1,500,000 · EducationJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY — $1,104,196 · EducationCivic Nation — $1,000,000 · EducationGEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY — $800,000 · EducationCLEAN ENERGY FUND OF TEXAS — $700,000 · EducationWE ARE DOWN HOME — $650,000 · EducationFRIENDSHIP PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOL INC — $500,000 · EducationYale University — $498,716 · Education+2 more — $250,000 · Education
Other$93,349,709Environment$70,009,204Philanthropy$23,103,000Health$17,043,434International$15,426,350Community Improvement$13,943,000Education$7,002,912

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 budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc — $15,244,036 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetRocky Mountain Institute — $7,375,524 over 3y, 3.8% of budgetPACT INC — $7,147,546 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetUNITED STATES ENERGY FOUNDATION — $7,100,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetWINDWARD FUND — $7,000,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetCLASP — $6,500,000 over 2y, 21% of budgetAmalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc — $5,350,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetCLIMATE AND CLEAN ENERGY EQUITY FUND — $5,000,000 over 2y, 8.5% of budgetCLIMATE POWER EDUCATION FUND — $4,000,000 over 1y, 34% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND — $4,000,000 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetPUERTO RICO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC — $4,000,000 over 1y, 43% of budgetALLIANCE FOR TRIBAL CLEAN ENERGY INC — $4,000,000 over 2y, 47% of budgetGlobal Impact — $3,880,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetGREAT PLAINS INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT INC — $3,500,000 over 2y, 15% of budgetCLIMATE JOBS NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER INC — $3,500,000 over 2y, 17% of budgetCOALITION FOR GREEN CAPITAL D/B/A AMERICAN GREEN BANK CONSORTIUM — $3,264,704 over 1y, 13% of budgetWESTERN CONSERVATION FOUNDATION — $3,000,000 over 2y, 10% of budgetLAWYERS FOR GOOD GOVERNMENT INC — $2,500,000 over 2y, 28% of budgetFARM-TO-POWER INC — $2,400,000 over 1y, 64% of budgetCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES — $2,000,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetFAIR SHOT TEXAS — $2,000,000 over 1y, 45% of budgetClean Future Forum Inc — $2,000,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetACUMEN FUND INC — $1,875,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetElevate Energy — $1,775,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetGRID ALTERNATIVES — $1,700,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetINCLUSIV INC — $1,605,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMULTIPLIER — $1,500,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetForward Together Wisconsin — $1,500,000 over 1y, 88% of budgetSolar United Neighbors Inc — $1,500,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetConservative Energy Network — $1,500,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetTHE GREENLINING INSTITUTE — $1,500,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetYOUTHBUILD GLOBAL INC — $1,500,000 over 1y, 6.0% of budgetSUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION — $1,500,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetGREENLIGHT AMERICA — $1,365,000 over 1y, 42% of budgetCLIMATE UNITED FUND — $1,329,500 over 2y, 46% of budgetCOMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER CAPITAL FUND INC — $1,300,000 over 1y, 22% of budgetCENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE — $1,250,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetSTATE DEMOCRACY PROJECT — $1,200,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetJobs with Justice Education Fund — $1,200,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetSOUTHEAST SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS — $1,143,000 over 1y, 90% of budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY — $1,104,196 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA CLEAN ENERGY FUND DBA CLEAN ENERGY FUND OF THE CAROLINAS — $1,100,000 over 1y, 45% of budgetCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC — $1,057,259 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAPPALACHIAN COMMUNITY CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION — $1,053,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetBENEFICIAL ELECTRIFICATION LEAGUE — $1,000,000 over 1y, 27% of budgetREWIRING AMERICA — $1,000,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetJOBS TO MOVE AMERICA — $1,000,000 over 1y, 8.4% of budgetGROUNDSWELL INC — $1,000,000 over 1y, 12% 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.

United States Energy …Windward FundNew Venture FundClimate Imperative Fo…Amalgamated Charitabl…The William & Flora H…The McKnight Foundati…Freedom Together Foun…Climateworks Foundati…The Energy FoundationJohn D and Catherine …The Heising-Simons Fo…
United States Energy FoundationCA73.5× affinity38 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United States Energy Foundation · Windward Fund · New Venture Fund · Climate Imperative Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · The McKnight Foundation · Freedom Together Foundation · Climateworks Foundation · The Energy Foundation · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · The Heising-Simons 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 Rf Catalytic Capital Inc 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 21%
  • Climate United Fund — 100% of income from government
  • Youthbuild Global Inc — 69% of income from government
  • Community Health Center Capital Fund Inc — 21% of income from government
  • Johns Hopkins University — 12% of income from government
  • Yale University — 12% of income from government
  • The Housing Partnership Network Inc — 10% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
14report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely on government for over half their income
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 Rf Catalytic Capital Inc?

Find your warmest path to Rf Catalytic Capital Inc 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 121 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 2024, released 2024. 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 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