How much did SK2 Fund grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 59% of SK2 Fund’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

becomeenvironmental sustainability

2021

environmental conservationempower womenfinancialresiliencewomenswomen entrepreneurslivelihoods

2022

youthoutdoorprotectrecreationrivershomelessclean

2023

sawtooth botanicalbuildingblackaligned investmentinvestment filmaccessiblequetzaltenango guatemala

2024

practiceswomen's reproductivereproductive healthprotect west'swest's treasuredcapitalsocial environmental

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

03FY2024 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k9 grants · $30k
$10k–50k9 grants · $115k
$50k–250k1 grant · $50k

$10,000

Median grant

States reached

$25M

Total assets

Largest grants

Just Economy Institute$50,000
Black Farmer Fund$15,000
Andean Alliance for Sustainable Dev$15,000
Idaho Conservation League$15,000
Advocates for the West$15,000
Posibility Labs$15,000
Senka Hill$10,000
Lady Saving Group$10,000
De La Gente$10,000
Peaceful Bamboo Family$10,000
Coop Cincy$5,000
American Rivers$5,000
Nevada Nordic$5,000
Realize Impact - Beneficial Returns$5,000
NWAA Fund$2,500

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 (FY23–23, $72k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10% — the area typically sits at 8%. 100% 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.

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 13% of SK2 Fund’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, 19% of the giving stays in ID; read by stated purpose it is 16% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

SK2 Fundlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address · 29% directed abroad (not shown)

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.

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.

40%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$328k · 14 repeat orgs$491k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +158% since the first grant, against +150% for the ones you funded once.

14 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$328k

$377k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+158%

+150%

Still filing today

57%

34%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 42% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $114k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EnvironmentEducationInternationalHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementHealthOther

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

IC
Idaho Conservation League
4× · 2021–2024 · $48k · revenue +69%
AF
Advocates for the West
4× · 2021–2024 · $44k · revenue +187%
AD
Amigos de Santa Cruz
2× · 2021–2023 · $25k · revenue +119%

Funded once

Possibility Labsgraduated
one grant, 2023 · $58k · revenue +14120%
SR
Swift River Farm
one grant, 2021 · $27k
RF
Reciprocity Fund
one grant, 2021 · $25k

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.

Asociacion Interamericana Para La

Use the law to protect the right to a healthy environment in the americas, primarily in latin america

Crime & Legal

Global Forest Generation

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,…

Environment

Eden Peopleplanet

To offer the dignity of fair employment to people living in impoverished communities, who become transformational agents of global forest restoration.

International

America's Watershed Initiative

America's watershed initiative (awi) is a collaboration working with hundreds of business, government, academic, and civic organizations to find solutions for the challenges of managing the mississippi river and the more than 250 rivers…

Human Services

The Sierra Fund

The Sierra Fund mission is to restore ecosystem and community resiliency in the Sierra Nevada. We rely on the principles of science, stewardship, environmental justice, and policy advocacy to promote headwater resiliency for the…

Environment

Intertribal Agriculture Council

Pursuing conservation, development & use of ag resources for the native american people

—

Amazon Watch

To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of indigenous peoples in the amazon basin.

Environment

Natura Bolivia Foundation

Natura Bolivia Foundation is dedicated to conserving rainforests and habitats in Latin America, in a way that contributes to the well-being of local communities. We also work to develop watershed conservation and incentive systems, and…

International

International Rivers Network

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

Environment

Alaska Conservation Foundation

Protects alaska's unique landscapes and ways of life by supporting conservation leaders, organizations, and initiatives.

Environment

A Greener World

AGW envisions a world where farming benefits people, animals and the environment through integrity and transparency. A Greener World identifies, audits, certifies and promotes practical, sustainable farming systems by supporting farmers…

Food & Nutrition

Rainforest Foundation Inc

The rainforest foundation us provides financial and technical support to indigenous communities and organizations to secure their rights to their traditional lands and protect their forests and livelihoods. we are tackling the world's most…

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Thousand Currents and the most unlike its peers is Untours Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 18 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) — 14% of your grantees by number, and just 13% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/24

the rest of the field

11%

206,164/1,819,541

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.

06the grantee network

23 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)

Early backer (in before they grew)

23/23

Grantees still filing

19/23

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$504,212Education$90,000Environment$79,139Human Services$71,500Community Improvement$40,000Recreation & Sports$22,500Health$11,000

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 Arthur B Schultz FoundationWY22.5× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Arthur B Schultz Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Christensen Family Foundation · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Patagoniaorg · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Endowment Foundation

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 SK2 Fund 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

2get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%

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: Afriwomen Network.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

low risk

7 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 3.3× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 311796082 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 Afriwomen Network, 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.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 8% of their budget — diversified.
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 SK2 Fund?

Find your warmest path to SK2 Fund 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.

SK2 Fund

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?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

23 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to SK2 Fund?

More from the funding graph

SK2 Fund

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?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

23 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to SK2 Fund?

More from the funding graph