Skip to content

· Private foundation

Soros Economic Development Fund

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.

$6.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
16
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$3.0M
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

International$4.0MHealth$2.2MArts & Culture$1.9MCommunity Improvement$1.7MCivil Rights$680kPhilanthropy$495kFood & Nutrition$300kScience & Tech$250kOther$0
02FY2024 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k8 grants · $1.2M
  • $250k+7 grants · $5.3M
$200,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$175M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ACUMEN FUND$3,000,000
ABORTION COALITION OF TELEMEDICINE$1,000,000
SCROLL MEDIA INC$270,000
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH INVESTORS ALLIANCE INC$250,000
INDIEGRAF MEDIA INC$250,000
FREE DEMOCRACY FOUNDATION$250,000
THE REIMAGINATION LAB$250,000
THE GLOBAL STEERING GROUP FOR IMPACT INVESTMENT$200,000
NATIONAL WOMEN'S HEALTH NETWORK$195,000
GLOBAL IMPACT INVESTING NETWORK$150,000
THE INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR TROPICAL AGRICULTURE$150,000
IPAS$150,000
MAYDAY HEALTH$150,000
GENDER IDEAL DBA REPRODUCTIVE & MATERNAL HEALTH$100,000
SYMPLIFICA$100,000
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.

US giving: 77% of grant dollars ($9.3M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 24% that went abroad ($2.8M) is mapped below.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY24–24, $1.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%ABORTION COALITION OF TELEMEDICINE: $1.0M → 17%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: 24% of all-years giving ($2.8M)

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

grant dollars sentlessmore
United Kingdom$2.0M · 9 grants
Canada$400k · 2 grants
Colombia$280k · 3 grants
Switzerland$150k · 1 grant
Uganda$50k · 1 grant
Belgium$10k · 1 grant
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 5% of Soros Economic Development Fund’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Soros Economic Development Fundlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 27% 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.

18%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.1M · 6 repeat orgs$9.5M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue 0% since the first grant, against -41% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 13 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
12

Total granted

$2.1M
$3.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
-41%

Still filing today

33%
17%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 5% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6.0M went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalHealthPhilanthropyHuman ServicesPublic BenefitArts & CultureOther
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

  • MD
    MEDIA DEVELOPMENT INVESTMENT FUND INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $760k · revenue -44%
  • AM
    AVON MUTUAL LTD
    2× · 2020–2021 · $419k
  • SW
    SOUTH WEST MUTUAL LTD
    2× · 2020–2021 · $419k

Funded once

  • HH
    HONEYBEE HEALTH INC
    one grant, 2023 · $650k
  • HS
    HALA SYSTEMS INC
    one grant, 2022 · $500k
  • NONPROFIT FINANCE FUND
    one grant, 2020 · $400k · revenue -41%
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
Accion International

Our mission is to create a fair and inclusive economy where underserved people have quality financial choices and opportunities to improve their economic well-being. we find and help build innovative companies with the potential to reach…

International
2
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
3
Inova Health System Foundation

Inova health system foundation is the parent of inova health system (ihs). ihs provides healthcare and related services throughout northern virginia and the greater metropolitan washington, d.c. area, including certain contiguous counties…

Health
4
Co-Impact Philanthropic Funds Inc

Philanthropic collaborative focused on improving lives through just & inclusive systems change.

Philanthropy
5
Upturn Inc

Upturn advances equity and justice in the design, governance, and use of technology.

—
6
Partnership On Ai to Benefit People and Society

Bringing diverse voices together across global sectors, disciplines, and demographics so developments in ai advance positive outcomes for people and society.

Science & Tech
7
Finreglab Inc

Finreglab is a d.c.-based research organization working at the intersection of financial innovation and public policy. our mission is to advance technology and data use to help people and small businesses manage their financial lives,…

Science & Tech
8
Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.

Education
9
Responsible Innovation Labs Inc

Building infrastructure that helps high-performing startups drive competitive advantage while advancing human flourishing and avoiding downstream harms to people, communities, and planet.

Science & Tech
10
International Women's Forum Inc

The mission of the international women's forum is to advance women's leadership worldwide. iwf takes direct action to achieve our mission in three important ways. connect: our convenings provide networking and cutting-edge content…

Education
11
Activate Global Inc

Activate empowers scientists to reinvent the world by bringing their research to market. activate partners with u.s. based funders, research institutions, and other pillars of the hard technology community to help entrepreneurial…

Environment
12
Middle East Investment Initiative Inc

Middle east investment initiative, inc. (meii) stimulates sustainable economic activity and long-lasting job creation in the middle east and north africa (mena) by designing and deploying finance and technical assistance programs to…

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New Venture Fund; the most unlike its peers is Gender Ideal Inc dba Reproductive & Maternal Health Com. 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

15 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. 15 of the 34 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
3/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HONEYBEE HEALTH INC: $650,000 · OtherHONEYBEE HEALTH INCHALA SYSTEMS INC: $500,000 · OtherHALA SYSTEMS INCAVON MUTUAL LTD: $419,252 · OtherAVON MUTUAL LTDSOUTH WEST MUTUAL LTD: $419,252 · OtherSOUTH WEST MUTUAL LTDGLOBAL ACCESS HEALTH: $400,000 · OtherGLOBAL ACCESS HEALTHOLDUVAI LTD: $366,895 · OtherOLDUVAI LTDSCROLL MEDIA INC: $270,000 · OtherENCOURAGE CAPITAL LLC: $250,000 · OtherLIKER LAND INC: $250,000 · OtherINDIEGRAF MEDIA INC: $250,000 · OtherTHE GLOBAL STEERING GROUP FOR IMPACT INVESTMENT: $200,000 · OtherThe Reimagination Lab Inc: $250,000 · Other+10 more: $1,140,000 · Other+10 moreACUMEN FUND INC: $3,000,000 · InternationalACUMEN FUND INC50BREAKTHROUGHS FOUNDATION: $300,000 · International50BREAKTHROUGHS FOUNDATIONIPAS: $150,000 · InternationalMEDIA DEVELOPMENT INVESTMENT FUND INC: $760,000 · PhilanthropyMEDIA DEVE…GLOBAL IMPACT INVESTING NETWORK INC: $245,000 · PhilanthropyGLOBAL IMP…HOPEWELL FUND: $125,000 · PhilanthropyHOPEWELL F…+1 more: $25,000 · PhilanthropyABORTION COALITION FOR TELEMEDICINE INC: $1,000,000 · Human ServicesABORTION …REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH INVESTORS ALLIANCE: $250,000 · HealthNational Women's Health Network: $240,000 · HealthNONPROFIT FINANCE FUND: $400,000 · Community ImprovementMOBILE VOTING FOUNDATION: $250,000 · Public Benefit
Other$5,365,399International$3,450,000Philanthropy$1,155,000Human Services$1,000,000Health$490,000Community Improvement$400,000Public Benefit$250,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetACUMEN FUND INC: $3,000,000 over 1y, 6.5% of budgetABORTION COALITION FOR TELEMEDICINE INC: $1,000,000 over 1y, 31% of budgetMEDIA DEVELOPMENT INVESTMENT FUND INC: $760,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetNONPROFIT FINANCE FUND: $400,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budget50BREAKTHROUGHS FOUNDATION: $300,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetMOBILE VOTING FOUNDATION: $250,000 over 1y, 19% of budgetREPRODUCTIVE HEALTH INVESTORS ALLIANCE: $250,000 over 1y, 9.7% of budgetThe Reimagination Lab Inc: $250,000 over 1y, 27% of budgetGLOBAL IMPACT INVESTING NETWORK INC: $245,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetNational Women's Health Network: $240,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetIPAS: $150,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetHOPEWELL FUND: $125,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGender IDEAL Inc dba Reproductive & Maternal Health Com: $100,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCONFLUENCE PHILANTHROPY INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.0% 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.

  • Who funds ACUMEN FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds ABORTION COALITION FOR TELEMEDICINE INC ↗
  • Who funds MEDIA DEVELOPMENT INVESTMENT FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds NONPROFIT FINANCE FUND ↗
  • Who funds 50BREAKTHROUGHS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MOBILE VOTING FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH INVESTORS ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds The Reimagination Lab Inc ↗
  • Who funds GLOBAL IMPACT INVESTING NETWORK INC ↗
  • Who funds National Women's Health Network ↗
  • Who funds IPAS ↗
  • Who funds HOPEWELL FUND ↗
  • Who funds Gender IDEAL Inc dba Reproductive & Maternal Health Com ↗
  • Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
  • Who funds CONFLUENCE PHILANTHROPY INC ↗

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.

John D and Catherine T Macarthur FoundationIL17.1× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · The Ford Foundation · Wallace Global Fund II · The Rockefeller Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · New Venture Fund · WK Kellogg Foundation · Tides Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · 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 Soros Economic Development Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Soros Economic Development Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%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
    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 · 0–75%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Soros Economic Development Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Soros Economic Development Fund through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 34 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 Soros Economic Development’s filings →

    More from the funding graph