Skip to content

· Private foundation

Rock What You Got Fund

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.

$700
Granted FY2023
2
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$500
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2023.

Health$3kCivil Rights$1kCommunity Improvement$200Education$53Environment$26Human Services$10
02FY2023 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$500
Median grant
1
States reached
$2k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$500
WOMEN'S CLUB OF MINNEAPOLIS$200
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 (FY22–22, $10) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%TEDXMINNEAPOLIS: $10 → 6%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.
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 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
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
2
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
3
Minnesota Women Lawyers

To advance the success of women attorneys and strive for a just society.

—
4
Planned Parenthood Minnesota North Dakota South Dakota

Affirming human rights to reproductive health and freedom.

Health
5
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.

—
6
Planned Parenthood North Central States Foundation

To build and maintain financial support for planned parenthood north central states to advance and protect sexual and reproductive health care for all.

Human Services
7
Planned Parenthood Voters of Nebraska

Planned parenthood voters of nebraska inspires and engages nebraskans to take up the cause of reproductive rights, health, education, and related topics through education, grassroots organizing, and legislative advocacy.

—
8
The Douglas County Community Health Clinic Incorporated

Empowering communities through specialized and inclusive reproductive health services.

—
9
Women's Foundation of Minnesota

Women's Foundation of Minnesota is a statewide community foundation investing in ending systemic inequities and driving innovation for gender and racial justice. WFM applies an Intersectional Equity Framework inclusive of gender, race,…

Philanthropy
10
Planned Parenthood Minnesota North Dakota South Dakota Action Fund

We mobilize supporters of all parties to defend and increase access to family planning services and fact based, medically accurate sexuality education. we work to inspire and engage citizens to take up the cause of reproductive health and…

—
11
Planned Parenthood of the Columbia Willamette Inc

The mission of planned parenthood of the columbia willamette (ppcw) is to provide, promote and protect access to quality reproductive and sexual health care in oregon and southwest washington.

Health
12
Planned Parenthood of the Heartland Inc

To provide, promote and protect reproductive and sexual health through health services, education and advocacy.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Gender Justice; the most unlike its peers is TEDxMinneapolis Incorporated. 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

8 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. 8 of the 11 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

OUR JUSTICE: $786 · HealthOUR JUSTICEWHOLE WOMAN'S HEALTH ALLIANCE: $525 · HealthWHOLE WOMAN'S HEALTH ALLIANCEPLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTH CENTRAL STATES: $525 · HealthPLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTH CENTRAL STATESPRO CHOICE MN FOUNDATION: $525 · OtherPRO CHOICE MN FOUNDATIONWE HEALTH CLINIC P A: $525 · OtherWE HEALTH CLINIC P AIndividual grant recipient: $500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+2 more: $79 · OtherGENDER JUSTICE: $787 · Crime & LegalGENDER JUSTICETHE WOMAN'S CLUB OF MINNEAPOLIS: $200 · Community ImprovementTEDxMinneapolis Incorporated: $10 · Human Services
Health$1,836Other$1,629Crime & Legal$787Community Improvement$200Human Services$10

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetGENDER JUSTICE: $787 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOUR JUSTICE: $786 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWHOLE WOMAN'S HEALTH ALLIANCE: $525 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTH CENTRAL STATES: $525 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWE HEALTH CLINIC P A: $525 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE WOMAN'S CLUB OF MINNEAPOLIS: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHOMAS IRVINE DODGE NATURE CENTER: $26 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTEDxMinneapolis Incorporated: $10 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.

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.

Women's Foundation of MinnesotaMN15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Women's Foundation of Minnesota · The Minneapolis Foundation · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Hrk Foundation · Hopewell Fund · New Venture Fund · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Rock What You Got Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rock What You Got Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%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
    0get no government money at all
    3report 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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Rock What You Got Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Rock What You Got Fund 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 11 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 Rock What You Got’s filings →

    More from the funding graph