· Private foundation
Rockefeller Brothers Fund Inc
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k67 grants · $96k
- $10k–50k148 grants · $4.5M
- $50k–250k387 grants · $36M
- $250k+44 grants · $20M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC | $4,500,000 |
| INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS | $700,000 |
| CHINA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FOUNDATION | $600,000 |
| ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC | $600,000 |
| BEIJING CHAOYANG DISTRICT YONGXU GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL INSTITUTE | $500,000 |
| BEIJING FRIENDS OF NATURE CHARITY FOUNDATION | $500,000 |
| ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE | $500,000 |
| GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY | $500,000 |
| COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER JOHNSTOWN | $500,000 |
| TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK | $500,000 |
| BRI INTERNATIONAL GREEN DEVELOPMENT COALITION | $450,000 |
| GUANGDONG HARMONY FOUNDATION | $400,000 |
| CHINA AFRICA PROJECT | $400,000 |
| RESOURCES LEGACY FUND | $400,000 |
| BEIJING ENTREPRENEUR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FOUNDATION | $400,000 |
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.
Your US giving — 68% of grant dollars ($190M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 32% that went abroad ($91M) is mapped below.
Your human-services grants (FY20–24, $5.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 90% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
Beyond the US — 32% of all-years giving ($91M)
51 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 8% of Rockefeller Brothers Fund 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.
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +24% since the first grant, against +8% for the ones you funded once.
556 repeat relationships — 392 still active in FY2024, 164 since wound down; 133 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8.1M went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
Rocky Mountain Institute5× · 2020–2024 · $3.3M · revenue +183%
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY5× · 2020–2024 · $2.9M · revenue +36%
NEO Philanthropy Inc5× · 2020–2024 · $2.8M · revenue +27%
Funded once
Potential Energy Coalition Incone grant, 2022 · $1.0M · revenue -27%- VRVOTER REGISTRATION PROJECTgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $500k · revenue +35%
- NYNEW YORK FOUNDATIONone grant, 2022 · $408k · revenue -32%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
The manhattan institute is a community of scholars, journalists, activists, and civic leaders dedicated to advancing opportunity, individual liberty, and the rule of law in america and its great cities.
The peterson institute for international economics (piie) is an independent nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to strengthening prosperity and human welfare in the global economy through expert analysis and practical…
CITY REPORT, INC. serves the people of New York through independent journalism that answers their information needs and holds the powerful to account.
To provide accurate, objective information and analysis on international strategic issues for legislators, diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business leaders, economists, the military, defense commentators, journalists,…
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
The international peace institute (ipi) bridges policy and real-world diplomacy, advising global leaders and shaping innovative policy solutions across the multilateral system, governments, and beyond through independent research and…
Cdp north america, inc. 's ("cdp-na") vision for the future is a thriving economy that works for people and planet in the long term. we focus investors and companies on taking urgent action to build a truly sustainable economy by measuring…
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…
To lead and coordinate the global initiative to address and prevent criminalization, violence, and impunity against indigenous peoples towards strengthening their collectives, solidarity, and actions.
International consortium of investigative journalists, inc.'s (icij) mission is to show people how the world really works through stories that rock the world; forcing positive change.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Policylink and the most unlike its peers is Greater Allen Cathedral of New York Hdfc. 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.
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 28 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.9% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
715 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. 715 of the 1,135 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC ↗
- Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
- Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds Rocky Mountain Institute ↗
- Who funds GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds NEO Philanthropy Inc ↗
- Who funds 2030 INC ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds TIDES CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE NEW YORK COMMUNITY TRUST ↗
- Who funds POLICYLINK ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION INC ↗
- Who funds STAND ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR STATE EFFECTIVENESS ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE JOBS NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds DEMOS A NETWORK FOR IDEAS AND ACTION LTD ↗
- Who funds SEATTLE INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds INSIDE CLIMATE NEWS INC ↗
- Who funds Trustees of Tufts College ↗
- Who funds New York University ↗
- Who funds PROTEUS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Oil Change International Inc ↗
- Who funds THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds MULTIPLIER ↗
- Who funds CERES INC ↗
- Who funds QUINCY INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIBLE STATECRAFT ↗
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.
Open a dossier: The Ford Foundation · Foundation to Promote Open Society · Mertz Gilmore Foundation · The Howard Gilman Foundation Inc · The Andrew W Mellon Foundation · Democracy Fund Inc · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · Wallace Global Fund II · United States Energy Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Booth Ferris Foundation Xxxxx4008
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 Rockefeller Brothers Fund 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.
- University of Delaware — 30% of income from government
- Icivics Inc — 13% of income from government
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- New England Aquarium Corporation — 12% of income from government
- Woodwell Climate Research Center Inc — 11% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- American Academy of Arts & Sciences — 3% of income from government
- Portland Art Museum — 1% of income from government
- Ceres Inc — 0% of income from government
- Bennington College Corporation — 0% of income from government
- Oxfam-America Inc — 0% of income from government
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.