Skip to content
Rf Catalytic Capital Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· 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 it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

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

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

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
ALLIANCE FOR TRIBAL CLEAN ENERGY$2,500,000
CLIMATE AND CLEAN ENERGY EQUITY FUND$2,500,000
WINDWARD FUND$2,500,000
FARM-TO-POWER INC$2,400,000
AMALGAMATED CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC$2,000,000
LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND$2,000,000
WINDWARD FUND$2,000,000
FAIR SHOT TEXAS$2,000,000
ACUMEN FUND INC$1,875,000
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 (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 its 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
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
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

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. 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 sends the money.

About 9% of Rf Catalytic Capital Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Rf Catalytic Capital Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 5.1% 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.

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

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +33% since the first grant, against -2% for those 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
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

  • 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
  • CF
    Clean Future Forum Incgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $2.0M · revenue +247%
  • COMMUNITY INITIATIVESgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $2.0M · revenue +46%
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
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Climate Power Education Fund; 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.
05the grantee network

110 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. 110 of the 121 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.

23
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
110/110
Grantees still filing
35/110
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and 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…ALLIANCE FOR TRIBAL CLEAN ENERGY INC: $4,000,000 · EnvironmentALLIANCE FOR TRIBAL CLEAN ENERGY …JUSTICE CLIMATE FUND INC: $4,000,000 · EnvironmentJUSTICE CLIMATE FUND INCCLIMATE POWER EDUCATION FUND: $4,000,000 · EnvironmentCLIMATE POWER EDUCATION FUNDLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $4,000,000 · EnvironmentLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDU…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 ImprovementTHE CAPITAL GOOD FUND: $500,000 · Community ImprovementGROWTH OPPORTUNITY PARTNERS INC: $500,000 · Community ImprovementCOMMON GROUND INC: $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 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 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 budgetALLIANCE FOR TRIBAL CLEAN ENERGY INC: $4,000,000 over 2y, 47% of budgetCLIMATE POWER EDUCATION FUND: $4,000,000 over 1y, 34% of budgetPUERTO RICO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $4,000,000 over 1y, 43% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $4,000,000 over 2y, 3.9% 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 budgetFAIR SHOT TEXAS: $2,000,000 over 1y, 45% of budgetClean Future Forum Inc: $2,000,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES: $2,000,000 over 1y, 3.4% 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 budgetTHE GREENLINING INSTITUTE: $1,500,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetSolar United Neighbors Inc: $1,500,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetSUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION: $1,500,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetMULTIPLIER: $1,500,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetConservative Energy Network: $1,500,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetYOUTHBUILD GLOBAL INC: $1,500,000 over 1y, 6.0% of budgetForward Together Wisconsin: $1,500,000 over 1y, 88% 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 budgetJobs with Justice Education Fund: $1,200,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetSTATE DEMOCRACY PROJECT: $1,200,000 over 1y, 2.4% 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 budgetREWIRING AMERICA: $1,000,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetGROUNDSWELL INC: $1,000,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetJOBS TO MOVE AMERICA: $1,000,000 over 1y, 8.4% of budgetCivic Nation: $1,000,000 over 1y, 3.5% 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.

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

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 Rf Catalytic Capital Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rf Catalytic Capital Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%funder's 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
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.
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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 121 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Rf Catalytic Capital’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