How much did ROCKEFELLER BROTHERS FUND INC grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 48% of ROCKEFELLER BROTHERS FUND INC’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2020

feedingrutgers presbyteriancovid emergencycovid responseglobal greenscenariosgood

2021

china'swomenswomen peacegivecivic assocationassocation crtacentercrtacenter research

2022

ukraine reliefmeetingnarrativesorganizing cultureculture changecaredocumentary film

2023

musicalmoving artistcolor womenwomen lgbtqsustainable biodiversityconservation southeastcampus

2024

climate adaptationretreatsummit futurehumanitariancongo basinderechosfire

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 635 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k67 grants · $96k
$10k–50k147 grants · $4.5M
$50k–250k377 grants · $35M
$250k+44 grants · $20M

$60,000

Median grant

States reached

$1.4B

Total assets

Largest grants

ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC$4,500,000
INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS$700,000
ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC$600,000
CHINA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FOUNDATION$600,000
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER JOHNSTOWN$500,000
BEIJING CHAOYANG DISTRICT YONGXU GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL INSTITUTE$500,000
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY$500,000
ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE$500,000
BEIJING FRIENDS OF NATURE CHARITY FOUNDATION$500,000
TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK$500,000
BRI INTERNATIONAL GREEN DEVELOPMENT COALITION$450,000
CHINA AFRICA PROJECT$400,000
RESOURCES LEGACY FUND$400,000
THE ECOLOGY TRUST$400,000
GUANGDONG HARMONY FOUNDATION$400,000

02The need

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 (FY20–24, $4.6M) land where the poverty rate runs at 13% — the area typically sits at 10%. 89% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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 line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — 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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$239M · 575 repeat orgs$36M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +63% since the first grant, against +37% for the ones you funded once.

575 repeat relationships — 403 still active in FY2024, 172 since wound down; 140 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

575

430

Total granted

$239M

$27M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+63%

+37%

Still filing today

56%

63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8.6M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Arts & CultureInternationalEnvironmentEducationPhilanthropyCivil RightsOther

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

ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC
5× · 2020–2024 · $11M · revenue +151%
NEW VENTURE FUND
5× · 2020–2024 · $7.1M · revenue +85%
TIDES FOUNDATION
2× · 2020–2021 · $4.4M · revenue +23%

Funded once

POTENTIAL ENERGY COALITION INCgraduated
one grant, 2022 · $1.0M · revenue +1192%
VR
VOTER REGISTRATION PROJECT
one grant, 2020 · $500k
NY
NEW YORK FOUNDATIONgraduated
one grant, 2022 · $408k · revenue +87%

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.

International Peace Institute Inc

The international peace institute is an independent, non-profit organization working to strengthen inclusive multilateralism for a more peaceful and sustainable planet. through its research, convening, and strategic advising, ipi provides…

International

Contemporary Policy Institute

Philanthropy

International Consortium of

Icij is a global investigative journalism network, an international newsroom and a builder of open-source tools that make sense of massive, complex datasets. our cross-border stories reveal broken systems and widespread corruption that…

International

International Center of Photography

The international center of photography is a center where photographs are collected, protected, researched, and exhibited; a place where students of all ages and accomplishments learn to make images and are challenged by technical and…

Arts & Culture

Guernica Centre for InternationalJustice

The Guernica Centre for International Justice represents the interests of victims in national and international legal proceedings, putting in place transnational accountability strategies that seek to maximize the protection of victims'…

International

Witness Inc

Witness helps people use video and technology to protect and defend human rights. the organization operates globally. witness' global team designs solutions, provides guidance, and co-develops strategies that enable human rights defenders…

International

New York City Energy Efficiency

Delivering financing solutions and advancing markets for energy efficiency and clean energy.

Environment

Center for International

The center for international private enterprise (cipe) is a non-profit global organization that works to strengthen democracy and build competitive, resilient markets in many of the world's most challenging environments. working alongside…

International

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

The American Assembly

A national non partisan public policy forum to illuminate issues of public policy.

—

Center for Arms Control and

A nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to enhancing international peace and security in the 21st century, thereby retaining its focus on nuclear weapons but expanding to include other present emerging security threats.

International

The International Institute for

International

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Policylink and the most unlike its peers is Occidental College. 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.

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 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.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.4% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.4%3/693

the rest of the field

11%

206,161/1,818,872

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

675 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

182

Early backer (in before they grew)

669/675

Grantees still filing

518/675

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$151,717,790Environment$31,569,431Philanthropy$30,234,030International$21,605,881Arts & Culture$16,155,481Education$13,287,477Public Benefit$10,656,278

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.

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.

The Ford FoundationNY100.4× affinity183 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ford Foundation · Mertz Gilmore Foundation · Foundation to Promote Open Society · The Howard Gilman Foundation Inc · Democracy Fund Inc · The Andrew W Mellon Foundation · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · Wallace Global Fund II · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Climateworks Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc

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 organisation 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

8get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: ANDIANA FOUNDATION.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

2 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 874810801 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on ANDIANA FOUNDATION, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
WatchSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 100% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Rockefeller Brothers Fund Inc?

Find your warmest path to Rockefeller Brothers Fund Inc through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

ROCKEFELLER BROTHERS FUND INC

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

675 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Rockefeller Brothers Fund Inc?

More from the funding graph

ROCKEFELLER BROTHERS FUND INC

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

675 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Rockefeller Brothers Fund Inc?

More from the funding graph