Skip to content
Smart Growth America at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Smart Growth America

SMART GROWTH AMERICA envisions a country where no matter where you live, or who you are, you can enjoy living in a place that is healthy, prosperous, and resilient.

$356k
Granted FY2023
1
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$356k
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 2023.

Community Improvement$1.0MCivil Rights$811kEnvironment$520kPublic Benefit$365kPhilanthropy$151kPublic Safety & Disaster$68kEducation$65kArts & Culture$48kOther$0
02FY2023 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$355,649
Median grant
1
States reached
$8.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GREATER GREATER WASHINGTON$355,649
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.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY17–17, $81k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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%CONEXION AMERICAS: $71k → 14%INDIANAPOLIS CONGREGATION ACTION NETWORK: $10k → 16%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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
MN
IL
NY
MA
OR
IN
PA
CA
KY
MD
TN
NC
DC
AL
FL
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.
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 14% of Smart Growth America’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Smart Growth Americalessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.4M · 11 repeat orgs$629k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +109% since the first grant, against +25% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2023, 10 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
24

Total granted

$2.4M
$629k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+109%
+25%

Still filing today

82%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
EnvironmentCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyEducationHuman ServicesCivil RightsOther
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

  • GG
    Greater Greater Washington
    6× · 2018–2023 · $811k · revenue +736% · 39% of their budget
  • FUSE Corps
    2× · 2019–2020 · $350k · revenue +86%
  • AF
    ALLIANCE FOR A JUST SOCIETY
    2× · 2021–2022 · $225k · revenue +109%

Funded once

  • IG
    INTEGRAL GROUP CONSULTING LLC
    one grant, 2018 · $185k
  • MR
    MINNEAPOLIS REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCEgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $83k · revenue +25%
  • CA
    CONEXION AMERICAS
    one grant, 2017 · $71k · revenue -22%
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
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
2
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments

Create a more accessible, sustainable, prosperous and livable national capital region by being a discussion forum, expert resource, issue advocate, and catalyst for action.

Public Benefit
3
Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and Industry

The minnesota chamber of commerce proactively leads the business community statewide to: advance pro-business, responsible minnesota public policy that creates jobs and grows the econony; provde member services to address evolving business…

—
4
Association of Washington Cities

The association of washington cities builds connections between our state's diverse cities and towns, while providing our members with the support needed to thrive through delivery of data-driven education, nationally recognized pooling…

—
5
Minnesota Business Partnership

The minnesota business partnership's mission is to maintain a high quality of life for all minnesotans by ensuring that the state's economy remains strong, globally competitive and its prospects for growth bright by working with elected…

—
6
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
7
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
8
Common Future

Common future is a network of pioneering leaders across the u.s. and canada who work deeply within their communities to create alternative approaches to business, philanthropy, and investing. we envision an economy that has transitioned…

Community Improvement
9
Greater Washington Partnership

We identify shared opportunities and core challenges and offer solutions to the region's most critical issues including skills and talent, regional mobility, infrastructure and inclusive economic growth.

Recreation & Sports
10
Alliance for Metropolitan Stability

The alliance is a coalition of community-based organizations and advocacy groups with a mission to build power across the intersections of geography, race, culture, and issues in the twin cities region to eliminate systems of oppression…

Community Improvement
11
Minnesota Council on Foundations

MCF is a vibrant philanthropic community connecting, strengthening and mobilizing the power of philanthropy to advance prosperity and equity.

—
12
Mid-City Community Advocacy Network

Mid-city community advocacy network works to build a safe, productive, and healthy community for the residents of city heights and greater san diego through collaboration, advocacy, and organizing.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Global Philanthropy Partnership; the most unlike its peers is Conservation Law Foundation Inc. 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

23 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. 23 of the 36 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/23
Grantees still filing
16/23
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CAPITAL E: $345,455 · OtherCAPITAL EINTEGRAL GROUP CONSULTING LLC: $184,973 · OtherINTEGRAL GROUP CONSULTING LLCMINNEAPOLIS REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $82,500 · OtherMINNEAPOLIS REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMM…APANO COMMUNITIES UNITED FUND: $55,000 · OtherAPANO COMMUNITIES UNITED FUNDCITY OF DOTHAN ALABAMA: $50,000 · OtherWALKSANDIEGO: $80,000 · OtherWALKSANDIEGONATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES INSTITUTE INC: $69,930 · OtherNATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES INSTITUTE …+13 more: $122,693 · Other+13 moreGreater Greater Washington: $811,237 · Civil RightsGreater Greater WashingtonFUSE Corps: $350,000 · Public BenefitFUSE CorpsCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC: $133,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION…MULTIPLIER: $125,000 · EnvironmentMULTIPLIERURBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK: $44,821 · EnvironmentURBAN SUSTAI…CONSERVATION MINNESOTA: $14,000 · EnvironmentST PAUL TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION: $13,333 · EnvironmentALLIANCE FOR A JUST SOCIETY: $225,000 · Community ImprovementALLIANCE FO…COMMUNITY PARTNERS: $55,000 · Community ImprovementCOMMUNITY P…JEFFERSON STREET UNITED MERCHANTS PARTNERSHIP CDC: $21,675 · Community ImprovementJEFFERSON S…+1 more: $8,325 · Community ImprovementGLOBAL PHILANTHROPY PARTNERSHIP: $144,821 · PhilanthropyCentral Indiana Community Foundation Inc: $50,000 · Philanthropy+1 more: $1,000 · PhilanthropyCONEXION AMERICAS: $70,800 · Human ServicesFaith in Indiana: $10,000 · Human Services
Other$990,551Civil Rights$811,237Public Benefit$350,000Environment$330,154Community Improvement$310,000Philanthropy$195,821Human Services$80,800

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 budgetGreater Greater Washington: $811,237 over 6y, 39% of budgetFUSE Corps: $350,000 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetALLIANCE FOR A JUST SOCIETY: $225,000 over 2y, 3.0% of budgetGLOBAL PHILANTHROPY PARTNERSHIP: $144,821 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC: $133,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetMULTIPLIER: $125,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetMINNEAPOLIS REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $82,500 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetWALKSANDIEGO: $80,000 over 2y, 3.1% of budgetCONEXION AMERICAS: $70,800 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetNATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES INSTITUTE INC: $69,930 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetCOMMUNITY PARTNERS: $55,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCentral Indiana Community Foundation Inc: $50,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetURBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK: $44,821 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetCONSERVATION MINNESOTA: $14,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetST PAUL TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION: $13,333 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetWIREGRASS MUSEUM OF ART INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetOASIS CENTER INC: $8,325 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSAINT PAUL AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $6,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetGehlorg Inc dba Gehl Institute: $1,000 over 1y, 2.3% 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.

The Energy FoundationNational Recreation a…The McKnight Foundati…United States Energy …The Kresge FoundationAARPThe Bloomberg Family …Surdna Foundation IncAmalgamated Charitabl…New Venture FundFirehouse Subs Public…The Robert Wood Johns…
The Energy FoundationCA15.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 10 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Energy Foundation · National Recreation and Park Association · The McKnight Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · The Kresge Foundation · AARP · The Bloomberg Family Foundation Inc · Surdna Foundation Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · New Venture Fund · Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation Inc · The Robert Wood Johnson 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 Smart Growth America funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Smart Growth America. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 36 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Smart Growth America’s 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