Skip to content
Smartmeme DBA Center for Story-based Strategy at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Smartmeme DBA Center for Story-based Strategy

Smartmeme inc.

$663k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$438k
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, FY2023 to 2025.

Education$438kCivil Rights$120kEnvironment$85kCommunity Improvement$67kHuman Services$60k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $105k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $120k
  • $250k+1 grant · $438k
$60,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$4.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
The Frameworks Institute$437,949
Social & Environmental Entrep$60,000
Center for Policy Initiatives$60,000
Central Valley Movement Build$35,000
Gender & Sexualities Alliance$35,000
Black Organizing Project$35,000
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 (FY24–25, $120k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 50% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%Black Organizing Project: $35k → 10%Center for Policy Initiatives: $60k → 11%Black Organizing Project: $25k → 10%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.
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

23%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$180k · 3 repeat orgs$589k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +17% since the first grant, against -5% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
2

Total granted

$180k
$32k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+17%
-5%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 16% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $558k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’23’24’25
EducationHuman ServicesEnvironmentCivil 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

  • GS
    Genders & Sexualities Alliance Network DBA GSA Network
    2× · 2024–2025 · $60k · revenue +17%
  • CV
    Central Valley Movement Building Organizing Institute
    2× · 2024–2025 · $60k · revenue +92%
  • TB
    The Black Organizing Project Inc
    2× · 2024–2025 · $60k · revenue 0%

Funded once

  • CJ
    CLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANCE
    one grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue -5%
  • MG
    Movement Generation
    one grant, 2024 · $7k · revenue -9%
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
California Environmental Justice Alliance

Our mission is to fight against fossil fuel executives and industries that have turned our communities into dumping grounds for toxic waste, poisoning our air, water, lan, and bodies. We organize to oppose giant oil refineries, dirty…

Environment
2
Jobs with Justice San Francisco

A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…

Employment
3
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
4
Central Valley Partnership

The Central Valley Partnership (CVP) conducts and collaborates in training initiatives, including community organizer training, education on labor history and issues, messaging workshops, etc., aimed at fostering the establishment of new…

Civil Rights
5
Climate Mobilization Project Inc

The organization is building power for a national transformation that rapidly restores a safe climate and creates a just and democratic society.

Environment
6
Bay Area Organizing Committee

A broad based network of local institutions - congregations, synagogues, non-profits and civic associations - that serve as a foundation for public relationships, leadership development and action around issues that affect our communities.

Unclassified
7
CarbonPlan

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

Environment
8
Center for Racial and Gender E Nfp

Workers Rights

Civil Rights
9
Grassroots Power Project

GPP works within and across social movement sectorsto foster greater alignment around shared goals and strategies for transformational change.Through a combination of strategic consulting and political education, our team helps groups make…

Education
10
The Oakland Institute

The Oakland Institute, an independent policy think tank, works to support global struggles for Indigenous rights, human rights, and land rights and to promote public participation and fair debate on critical social, economic, and…

Food & Nutrition
11
Oregon Justice Network

Oregon Justice Network is an alliance built and staffed by criminal legal system impacted people advocating for the well-being of people affected or at-risk of being affected by carceral systems. Our work centers around restorative…

Human Services
12
Partnership for Policy Integrity

Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc; the most unlike its peers is Central Valley Movement Building Organizing Institute. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

8 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
3/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FRAMEWORKS INSTITUTE: $437,949 · EducationFRAMEWORKS INSTITUTE+1 more: $6,500 · EducationCENTER ON POLICY INITIATIVES: $60,000 · Human ServicesCENTER ON POLICY …The Black Organizing Project Inc: $60,000 · Human ServicesThe Black Organiz…SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $60,000 · EnvironmentSOCIAL AND E…CLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANCE: $25,000 · EnvironmentCLIMATE JUST…Genders & Sexualities Alliance Network DBA GSA Network: $60,000 · Civil RightsCentral Valley Movement Building Organizing Institute: $60,000 · Other
Education$444,449Human Services$120,000Environment$85,000Civil Rights$60,000Other$60,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFRAMEWORKS INSTITUTE: $437,949 over 1y, 7.4% of budgetGenders & Sexualities Alliance Network DBA GSA Network: $60,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetCentral Valley Movement Building Organizing Institute: $60,000 over 2y, 5.3% of budgetThe Black Organizing Project Inc: $60,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetCLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANCE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMovement Generation: $6,500 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.

The California Endowm…The William & Flora H…Marin Community Found…Amalgamated Charitabl…Tides FoundationSilicon Valley Commun…Fidelity Investments …
The California EndowmentCA13.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The California Endowment · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Tides Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Smartmeme DBA Center for Story-based Strategy funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Smartmeme DBA Center for Story-based Strategy. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 8 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Smartmeme DBA Center for Story-based Strategy’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