· Public charity
State Policy Network
STATE POLICY NETWORK's (spn) mission is to catalyze thriving, durable freedom movements in every state, anchored with high-performing, independent think tanks.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k14 grants · $385k
- $50k–250k32 grants · $2.8M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| OPPORTUNITY ARKANSAS | $166,625 |
| SOUTH CAROLINA POLICY COUNCIL | $160,000 |
| LIBERTAS INSTITUTE | $155,000 |
| GEORGIA PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION | $143,500 |
| OKLAHOMA COUNCIL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS | $142,862 |
| YANKEE INSTITUTE | $124,000 |
| GEORGIA CENTER FOR OPPORTUNITY | $122,000 |
| INSTITUTE FOR REFORMING GOVERNMENT | $112,000 |
| PALMETTO PROMISE INSTITUTE | $105,500 |
| COMMONWEALTH FOUNDATION | $105,000 |
| EMPOWER MISSISSIPPI FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| PIONEER INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH | $95,000 |
| PELICAN INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY | $93,000 |
| CARDINAL INSTITUTE FOR WEST VIRGINIA POLICY | $90,000 |
| INDEPENDENCE INSTITUTE | $75,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $1.5M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 97% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +62% since the first grant, against +18% for the ones you funded once.
59 repeat relationships — 40 still active in FY2024, 19 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $315k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- GCGeorgia Center for Opportunity Inc8× · 2017–2024 · $1.5M · revenue +99%
- BCBEACON CENTER OF TENNESSEE7× · 2018–2024 · $1.4M · revenue +106%
- PUPEOPLE UNITED FOR PRIVACY FOUNDATION4× · 2019–2022 · $1.4M · revenue +246% · 93% of their budget
Funded once
- ILINSPIRED LIFE INCone grant, 2022 · $125k · revenue -68%
- FFFREEDOM FOUNDATIONone grant, 2022 · $100k · revenue +11% · 84% of their budget
- NMNATIONAL MICROSCHOOLING CENTERgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $75k · revenue +74%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
It is the mission of the Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI) to provide education, research, analysis and recommendations to policy makers, opinion leaders and the American people designed to help solve public policy problems through…
The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…
To teach and disseminate educational materials to the public.
To educate the public on constitutional issues and public policy matters. We are dedicated to the principles of individual liberty, peace through strength, limited government, free enterprise, and the values embodied in the Declaration of…
Competitive enterprise institute (cei) is a non-profit public policy organization dedicated to the principles of free enterprise and limited government. we believe that consumers are best helped not by government regulation but by being…
The manhattan institute is a community of scholars, journalists, activists, and civic leaders dedicated to advancing opportunity, individual liberty, and the rule of law in america and its great cities.
To provide thoughtful, conservative solutions to the challenges presented by education, workforce, labor and employment issues.
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
To promote the ideals of free market economics, individual liberty, and limited government through the conduct of public opinion research.
Disseminate information and education about pertinent economic, social and governmental topics, via print, web and other media to educate the public about the principles of LIbertarianism.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Foundation for Government Accountability Inc and the most unlike its peers is Freedom 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 22 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
88 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 88 of the 94 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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.
- Who funds Georgia Center for Opportunity Inc ↗
- Who funds BEACON CENTER OF TENNESSEE ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE UNITED FOR PRIVACY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Cardinal Institute for West Virginia Policy Inc ↗
- Who funds PELICAN INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR REFORMING GOVERNMENT INC ↗
- Who funds ILLINOIS POLICY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds INDEPENDENCE INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds THE COMMONWEALTH FOUNDATION FOR PUBLIC POLICY ALTERNATIVES ↗
- Who funds The Buckeye Institute ↗
- Who funds SOUTH CAROLINA POLICY COUNCIL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA POLICY CENTER ↗
- Who funds PIONEER INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds OKLAHOMA COUNCIL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS INC ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Libertas Network ↗
- Who funds EMPIRE CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY INC ↗
- Who funds MACKINAC CENTER ↗
- Who funds EMPOWER MISSISSIPPI FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds YANKEE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY ↗
- Who funds THE JAMES MADISON INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY STUDIES INC ↗
- Who funds OPPORTUNITY ARKANSAS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ALASKA POLICY FORUM INC ↗
- Who funds BARRY GOLDWATER INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds WISCONSIN INSTITUTE FOR LAW & LIBERTY ↗
- Who funds KANSAS POLICY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Palmetto Promise Institute ↗
- Who funds THE JOHN LOCKE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds BADGER INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds CASCADE POLICY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Center of the American Experiment ↗
- Who funds THE MAINE HERITAGE POLICY CENTER ↗
- Who funds GARDEN STATE INITIATIVE INC ↗
- Who funds EVERGREEN FREEDOM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ALABAMA POLICY INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds IOWANS FOR TAX RELIEF ↗
- Who funds TEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BOUNDARY LINE FOUNDATION ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Donors Trust Inc · The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation Inc · The Roe Foundation · Adolph Coors Foundation · Atlas Economic Research Foundation · The Seminar Network Inc · Bradley Impact Fund Inc · Beth and Ravenel Curry Foundation · Charles Koch Institute · Charles Koch Foundation · EdChoice Inc · The Chase Foundation of Virginia
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 organization State Policy Network 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.
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 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.