· Public charity
Rsf Social Finance Inc
We envision a world where all people have the power to use their money to regenerate people, communities, and the planet.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 457 grants below total $48,191,400 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $60,394,155 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $12,202,755 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k52 grants · $362k
- $10k–50k257 grants · $5.1M
- $50k–250k113 grants · $11M
- $250k+35 grants · $32M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| IMPACTASSETS INC | $5,520,632 |
| NATIONAL BLACK FOOD AND JUSTICE ALLIANCE | $3,008,514 |
| GLOBAL WHOLE BEING FUND | $2,650,000 |
| LIVING LANDS TRUST | $2,338,139 |
| NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST | $2,283,054 |
| NEW WORLD FOUNDATION | $1,663,198 |
| EKVNV YEFOLECVLKE | $1,310,315 |
| FWDUS EDUCATION FUND INC | $1,250,000 |
| QUIPA INC | $1,020,000 |
| IMPACT CHARITABLE | $1,000,000 |
| COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF SAN BENITO COUNTY | $833,185 |
| FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND | $764,104 |
| FRIENDS OF VANCOUVER FOUNDATION | $721,195 |
| INQUIRING SYSTEMS INC | $590,000 |
| THE FARM SCHOOL INC | $506,000 |
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 human-services grants (FY17–24, $21.4M) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 80% 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
Grants abroad, by region — $11M on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 9 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: FOR GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT · TO REVIEW THE OASIS MATHARE STRATEGIC PLAN · TO SUPPORT CONFLICT AFFECTED, FLEEING AND INTERNALLY DISPLACED PASTORALIST HERDERS ACCESS WATER FOR THEIR LIVESTOCK AND FAMILIES
Stated purpose: FOR STEPPE DISCOVERIES: EXPLORING EASTERN MONGOLIA'S GRASSLAND ECOSYSTEM AND CULTURAL HERITAGE · FOR "LEARNING BY DOING-LEGAL CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES RIGHTS DEFENDER" PROJECT · FOR SHE BUILDS PEACE: MIND HER VOICE, LEAD THE CHANGE, SHAPE THE FUTURE
Stated purpose: FOR STRENGTHENING TERRITORIAL GOVERNANCE AND REVALUING ANCESTRAL KNOWLEDGE THROUGH THE ACTIVE AND PROACTIVE PARTICIPATION OF INDIGENOUS CHORTI' WOMEN · FOR EMPOWERING INDIGENOUS MAYA WOMEN THROUGH BIOCULTURAL INNOVATION USING LOCAL FOREST PRODUCE · FOR PATHWAYS OF KNOWLEDGE: INTEGRATING TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY TO EMPOWER STUDENTS IN THE FIGHT AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE PROMOTION OF SUSTAINABLE JOBS
Stated purpose: TO SUPPORT THE DISTRIBUTION OF ANTHROPOSOPHICAL NEWS AND EDUCATION · TO SUPPORT GUINEAN COMMUNITY AND NGO PARTICIPATION IN AN EXPOSURE VISIT TO GERMANY · TO SUPPORT THE DEFUND AGRIBUSINESS GATHERING
Stated purpose: FOR TERRITORIAL REGENERATION OF TLAOLA MOUNTAIN; REFORESTATION IN THE INDIGENOUS MUNICIPALITY OF TLAOLA, PUEBLA IN RESPONSE TO THE 2024 FIRES · FOR GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT · TO SUPPORT MAKEWAY FOUNDATION'S WILDLANDS FUND FOR PROTECTION OF THE HUDSON BAY AND JAMES BAY LOWLANDS AND CARBON-RICH FORESTS OF THE BOREAL
Stated purpose: TO SUPPORT GUINEA-SIMANDOU DELEGATION IN MINAS GERAIS AND CONTRIBUTE TO RELIEF EFFORTS FOR DAM FLOODING VICTIMS · FOR EMERGENCY SUPPORT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLE AFFECTED BY FLOODS AND FIRES · FOR GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT
Stated purpose: TO EMPOWER WOMEN AND YOUTH TO CONTRIBUTE TO SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT THROUGH ADVANCING LEADERSHIP, RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION IN SUNDARGARH DISTRICT · FOR REVITALIZING INDIGENOUS ECONOMIES: EMPOWERING WOMEN THROUGH CULTURAL HERITAGE AND ECONOMIC AUTONOMY IN NAGALAND · TO EMPOWER INDIGENOUS LANGUAGES THROUGH INDIGENOUS-LED COMMUNITY TELEVISION IN NEPAL
Stated purpose: FOR SUPPORT AND DEVELOPMENT OF TRADITIONAL PRACTICES AT THE ULYTAU PETROGLYPHS (ON THE EXAMPLE OF THE TEREKTY-AULIE COMPLEX) · FOR PRESERVATION AND DISSEMINATION OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT PETROGLYPHS OF NURATA MOUNTAINS (SARMYSHSOY, CHANGLISOY, BIYRONSOY) THROUGH PUBLICATION OF THE BOOK-ALBUM · FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF LOCAL CROPS COMMUNITY SEED BANK IN RASHT DISTRICT, TAJIKISTAN
Stated purpose: FOR #COOP-TECH LOCAL MOBILE INCUBATOR
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 14% of Rsf Social Finance 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. Read by recipient address, 27% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 25% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
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 +41% since the first grant, against +22% for the ones you funded once.
622 repeat relationships — 297 still active in FY2024, 325 since wound down; 135 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, 77% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8.0M 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
- FEFWDUS EDUCATION FUND INC5× · 2020–2024 · $7.8M · revenue +30%
- CLCHOOSE LOVE INC5× · 2019–2023 · $6.9M · revenue +163% · 28% of their budget
- LLLIVING LANDS TRUST7× · 2017–2024 · $6.8M · revenue +176% · 82% of their budget
Funded once
FOUNDATION FOR LOUISIANAgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $1.2M · revenue +55% · 25% of their budget- GIGroundswell International Incgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $510k · revenue +63%
- BRBeneficial Returnsone grant, 2019 · $500k
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.
Taproot Earth works with communities to support strategies around the use of water, energy and land.
Global Forest Generation restores and protects forest ecosystems in partnership with grassroots leaders and local communities across vast landscapes which play a critical role in preserving water, protecting biodiversity, storing carbon,…
Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.
To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.
To offer the dignity of fair employment to people living in impoverished communities, who become transformational agents of global forest restoration.
The Alliance for Collective Action convenes leaders of environmental and social movements to advance solutions for a thriving planet. We advance our mission through the Alliance Center building and community, as well as through Collective…
EFIs mission is to transform the produce industry and the lives of farmworkers by facilitating collaboration among workers, agricultural employers, retail buyers and consumer advocates.
To empower frontline communities to lead nature-based solutions that advance climate justice, ecosystem restoration, and resilient livelihoods through connecting locally-led initiatives to funding, markets, and technical support.
Development in Gardening is improving the nutrition and livelihoods of some of the world's most uniquely marginalized people by teaching them to plant regenerative gardens that grow health, wealth, and a sense of belonging.
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
The charitable activities of the Good Work Institute are designed to strengthen collaboration; address legacies of unequal power; and encourage a transition to regenerative ecological and social systems.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc and the most unlike its peers is Ho Chou Family Foundation. 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 22 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) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% 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.
1233 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. 1233 of the 1,357 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 IMPACTASSETSINC ↗
- Who funds FWDUS EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds CHOOSE LOVE INC ↗
- Who funds LIVING LANDS TRUST ↗
- Who funds THE NEW WORLD FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Land is Life Inc ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL WHOLE BEING FUND ↗
- Who funds EKVNV YEFOLECVLKE ↗
- Who funds National Black Food and Justice Alliance ↗
- Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds The Cultural ConservancySacred Land Foundation ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST ↗
- Who funds BOSTON IMPACT INITIATIVE FUND ↗
- Who funds Center for Third World Organizing ↗
- Who funds Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc ↗
- Who funds Higher Purpose Hub ↗
- Who funds FEDERATION OF SOUTHERN COOPERATIVES ↗
- Who funds THE DENVER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds JUBILEE JUSTICE INC ↗
- Who funds THE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL GREENGRANTS FUND ↗
- Who funds HAWTHORNE VALLEY ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds Friends International Inc ↗
- Who funds PROTEUS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds COMMON COUNSEL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds INQUIRING SYSTEMS INC ↗
- Who funds CULTURAL SURVIVAL INC ↗
- Who funds THE POLLINATION PROJECT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Canticle Farm ↗
- Who funds The Farm School Inc ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR LOUISIANA ↗
- Who funds QUEER ASTERISK ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA INDIAN MUSEUM & CULTURAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds WOMEN MAKE MOVIES INC ↗
- Who funds NDN COLLECTIVE INC ↗
- Who funds Health in Harmony ↗
- Who funds QUIPA INC ↗
- Who funds IMPACT CHARITABLE ↗
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: Common Counsel Foundation · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Novo Foundation · The Triskeles Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Possibility Labs · Movement Strategy Center · Windward Fund · Solidaire Network Inc · Clif Family Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Ndn Collective 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 organization Rsf Social Finance 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.
- Presencing Institute Inc — 28% of income from government
- The Farm School Inc — 12% of income from government
- Third Sector New England Inc — 3% of income from government
- Resist Inc — 2% of income from government
- Farm and Wilderness Foundation Inc — 0% of income from government
- Infact Dba Corporate Accountability — 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.