Skip to content
Saul Foundation for Progress Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Saul Foundation for Progress Inc

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.

$1.7M
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$600k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

International$3.5MHealth$2.8MPhilanthropy$1.3MCrime & Legal$991kScience & Tech$500kEducation$291kAnimals$100kHuman Services$2k
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $50k–250k2 grants · $390k
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.3M
$300,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$44M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CAMBRIDGE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CONSULTANTS$600,000
NOMI NETWORK INC$392,000
INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE$300,000
WATER FOR SOUTH SUDAN INC$244,330
FISTULA FOUNDATION$145,925
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.

US giving: 86% of grant dollars ($8.1M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 14% that went abroad ($1.4M) is mapped below.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY18–18, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%COMMUNITY HELP IN PARK SLOPE INC: $2k → 20%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.

Beyond the US: 14% of all-years giving ($1.4M)

3 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
France$600k · 2 grants
United Kingdom$485k · 2 grants
Canada$291k · 2 grants
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
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 6% of Saul Foundation for Progress Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Saul Foundation for Progress Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 19% 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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$7.0M · 8 repeat orgs$1.2M to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
4

Total granted

$7.0M
$852k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+40%
+281%

Still filing today

75%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $300k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalHealthCrime & LegalHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther
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

  • CR
    CAMBRIDGE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CONSULTANTS
    5× · 2019–2024 · $2.0M · revenue +491% · 66% of their budget
  • IR
    IBIS REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH INC
    5× · 2019–2023 · $1.7M · revenue +122%
  • NN
    NOMI NETWORK INC
    3× · 2021–2024 · $991k · revenue +40%

Funded once

  • TI
    THE IVORY FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2018 · $500k
  • TC
    THE CLEAR FUNDgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $250k · revenue +130%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $100k
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
Mali Health Organizing Project Inc

Mali Health improves maternal and child health by supporting women, communities, and the community health system to develop local solutions that ensure every mother and child has access to quality primary care. We aim to end preventable…

Community Improvement
2
International Rivers Network

International Rivers protects rivers and defends the rights of communities that depend on them.

Environment
3
Pathfinder International

Pathfinder expands access to sexual and reproductive health services, opening the door to opportunities for women and all individuals to thrive-economically, educationally, and civically. driven by our country-led leadership and local…

International
4
Global Financial Integrity

Global Financial Integrity works to curtail illicit financial flows by conducting groundbreaking research, promoting pragmatic policy solutions, and advising governments.

International
5
Intrahealth International Inc

Our mission is to improve the performance of health workers and strengthen the systems in which they work.

Health
6
Gardens for Health International

Gardens for Health International works to provide lasting agricultural solutions to chronic childhood malnutrition

International
7
Circle of Health International

COHIs mission is to work with women and their communities in times of crisis and disaster to ensure access to quality reproductive, maternal and newborn care. See Sch O for full mission.

—
8
The International Refugee Rights Initiative

To enhance the protection of rights of the displaced worldwide by the provision of advice and assistance on the application of international law, the conducting of research on the interpretation and application of international law and the…

—
9
Trustafrica

Promote peace, democracy and economic prosperity in Africa.

International
10
Shift Project Ltd

At Shift, we have one purpose: to transform how business gets done in order to ensure respect for peoples lives and dignity. We believe that the best way to advance our mission is by working directly with Businesses to help shape their…

International
11
MedGlobal Inc

MedGlobal is a humanitarian non-governmental organization working to serve vulnerable communities around the world by providing innovative, free, and sustainable healthcare. Our health services support refugees, displaced persons, and…

Health
12
International Medical Corps

To save lives & relieve suffering through health interventions & related activities that strengthen communities affected by conflict, natural disasters & disease outbreaks.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ibis Reproductive Health Inc; the most unlike its peers is Cambridge Reproductive Health Consultants. 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

11 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. 11 of the 15 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

IBIS REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH INC: $1,672,500 · HealthIBIS REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH INCThe Fistula Foundation: $750,123 · HealthThe Fistula FoundationGYNUITY HEALTH PROJECTS INC: $360,000 · HealthGYNUITY HEALTH PROJECTS INCCAMBRIDGE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CONSULTANTS: $1,996,110 · InternationalCAMBRIDGE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CON…Water for South Sudan Inc: $483,145 · InternationalWater for South Sudan IncInternational Rescue Committee INC: $300,000 · InternationalInternational Rescue Committee IN…THE IVORY FOUNDATION: $500,000 · OtherTHE IVORY FOUNDA…DEVELOPMENT MEDIA INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATES: $485,000 · OtherDEVELOPMENT MEDI…UNIVERSITE LAVAL: $290,722 · OtherUNIVERSITE LAVALIndividual grant recipient: $100,000 · OtherIndividual grant…NOMI NETWORK INC: $991,246 · Crime & LegalNOMI NETWOR…FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $825,000 · Community ImprovementFIDELITY …BANK OF AMERICA CHARITABLE GIFT FD: $500,000 · PhilanthropyTHE CLEAR FUND: $250,000 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY HELP IN PARK SLOPE INC: $2,000 · Human Services
Health$2,782,623International$2,779,255Other$1,375,722Crime & Legal$991,246Community Improvement$825,000Philanthropy$750,000Human Services$2,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCAMBRIDGE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CONSULTANTS: $1,996,110 over 5y, 66% of budgetIBIS REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH INC: $1,672,500 over 5y, 7.6% of budgetNOMI NETWORK INC: $991,246 over 3y, 7.6% of budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $825,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetThe Fistula Foundation: $750,123 over 4y, 1.5% of budgetWater for South Sudan Inc: $483,145 over 2y, 11% of budgetGYNUITY HEALTH PROJECTS INC: $360,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $300,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CLEAR FUND: $250,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

National Philanthropi…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Philanthropic TrustPA11.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Saul Foundation for Progress Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Saul Foundation for Progress Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 9%
  • Ibis Reproductive Health Inc: 9% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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.

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 15 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Saul Foundation for Progress’ 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