Skip to content
Taitanchi Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Taitanchi Foundation Inc

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.

$392k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$285k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Environment$21MArts & Culture$5.3MSocial Science$603kFood & Nutrition$200kEducation$89kCivil Rights$50kScience & Tech$25kHuman Services$10kOther$0
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
  • $250k+1 grant · $285k
$75,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BIONEERS - COLLECTIVE HERITAGE INSTITUTE$285,000
GRAND CANYON TRUST$75,000
FLAGSTAFF SHAKESPEARE FESTIVAL$25,000
THE NEW SCHOOL$6,750
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 (FY24–24, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, 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%FLAGSTAFF SHAKESPEARE FESTIVAL: $25k → 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
NY
MA
PA
CT
CA
VA
AZ
NM
NC
DC
LA
GA
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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$26M · 13 repeat orgs$2.3M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +51% since the first grant, against +47% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
18

Total granted

$26M
$2.3M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+51%
+47%

Still filing today

54%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentEducationCrime & LegalSocial ScienceInternationalHuman ServicesOther
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

  • TC
    THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRATIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS
    3× · 2019–2021 · $960k · revenue +149% · 99% of their budget
  • CE
    Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund
    2× · 2017–2018 · $500k · revenue +51%
  • TG
    THE GRAND CANYON TRUST INC
    3× · 2018–2024 · $234k · revenue +156%

Funded once

  • S
    SEASEER
    one grant, 2019 · $1.0M
  • A8
    AKIING 8TH FIRE
    one grant, 2022 · $300k · revenue -94%
  • 3
    350ORG
    one grant, 2018 · $250k · revenue -17%
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
Environment Now
—
2
Collaborative Earth Institute

We are scientists and engineers, humanists and designers. Coming together across disciplinary and cultural boundaries, we form focused teams to discover and co-create pathways to social and ecological regeneration.

Science & Tech
3
International Council On Environmental Economics and Development Union
Human Services
4
Amazon Watch Inc

To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with Indigenous communities in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability, and the preservation of the Amazon Basin's…

Environment
5
Nature for Justice

To empower frontline communities to lead nature-based solutions that advance climate justice, ecosystem restoration, and resilient livelihoods through connecting locally-led initiatives to funding, markets, and technical support.

Environment
6
Center for Contemporary Documentation Inc
Philanthropy
7
E3G Third Generation Environmentalism

E3g is a leading international not-for-profit think tank specialising in climate diplomacy harnessing expertise in the politics and economics of climate change.

Environment
8
Rainforest Foundation Inc

The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.

Environment
9
One Earth Philanthropy

One Earth's mission is to empower everyone, everywhere, with the knowledge, inspiration, and opportunity to heal the Earth and reclaim our future.

Environment
10
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
11
Global Envirotech Initiative
Philanthropy
12
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Center for Democratic and Environmental Rights; the most unlike its peers is Indigenous Environmental Network. 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

21 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. 21 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/21
Grantees still filing
14/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AMAZON CONSERVATION TEAM (ACT): $14,770,000 · OtherAMAZON CONSERVATION TEAM (ACT)BIONEERS - COLLECTIVE HERITAGE INSTITUTE: $5,008,060 · OtherBIONEERS - COLLECTIVE HERITAGE INSTITUTESEASEER: $1,000,000 · Other+13 more: $2,061,300 · Other+13 moreHONOR THE EARTH: $2,565,000 · EnvironmentHONOR THE EARTHTHE CENTER FOR DEMOCRATIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS: $960,000 · EnvironmentTHE CENTER FOR DE…EARTH DAY NETWORK INC: $252,500 · EnvironmentEARTH DAY NETWORK…350ORG: $250,000 · Environment350ORGTHE GRAND CANYON TRUST INC: $234,000 · EnvironmentTHE GRAND CANYON …+3 more: $60,437 · EnvironmentCommunity Environmental Legal Defense Fund: $500,000 · Crime & LegalAKIING 8TH FIRE: $300,000 · EducationGREENWAVE ORGANIZATION CORP: $70,000 · EducationCHAKANA MEDIA INC: $50,000 · EducationTHE NEW SCHOOL INC: $18,665 · Education+1 more: $11,300 · EducationFOOD & WATER WATCH: $200,000 · Food & NutritionCOLLECTIVE HERITAGE INSTITUTE: $100,000 · Social ScienceFlagstaff Shakespeare Festival: $25,000 · Human ServicesEmpowerment Works Inc: $5,000 · International
Other$22,839,360Environment$4,321,937Crime & Legal$500,000Education$449,965Food & Nutrition$200,000Social Science$100,000Human Services$25,000International$5,000

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 budgetHONOR THE EARTH: $2,565,000 over 5y, 19% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR DEMOCRATIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS: $960,000 over 3y, 99% of budgetPolaris Institute USA: $750,000 over 5y, 24% of budgetAKIING 8TH FIRE: $300,000 over 1y, 7.5% of budgetEARTH DAY NETWORK INC: $252,500 over 2y, 6.4% of budget350ORG: $250,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetTHE GRAND CANYON TRUST INC: $234,000 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetFOOD & WATER WATCH: $200,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetCOLLECTIVE HERITAGE INSTITUTE: $100,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetGREENWAVE ORGANIZATION CORP: $70,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetCHAKANA MEDIA INC: $50,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetFlagstaff Shakespeare Festival: $25,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetTHE NEW SCHOOL INC: $18,665 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetUNITED HOUMA NATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetThe Pachamama Alliance: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEarth Island Institute Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEmpowerment Works Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% 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 HONOR THE EARTH ↗
  • Who funds THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRATIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS ↗
  • Who funds Polaris Institute USA ↗
  • Who funds Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund ↗
  • Who funds AKIING 8TH FIRE ↗
  • Who funds EARTH DAY NETWORK INC ↗
  • Who funds 350ORG ↗
  • Who funds THE GRAND CANYON TRUST INC ↗
  • Who funds FOOD & WATER WATCH ↗
  • Who funds COLLECTIVE HERITAGE INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds GREENWAVE ORGANIZATION CORP ↗
  • Who funds CHAKANA MEDIA INC ↗
  • Who funds Center for Sustainable Coast ↗
  • Who funds Flagstaff Shakespeare Festival ↗
  • Who funds THE NEW SCHOOL INC ↗
  • Who funds INDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds UNITED HOUMA NATION INC ↗
  • Who funds The Pachamama Alliance ↗
  • Who funds Earth Island Institute Inc ↗
  • Who funds Empowerment Works Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗

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.

ImpactassetsincSilicon Valley Commun…The Peterffy Foundati…Rsf Social Finance IncAmalgamated Charitabl…Rockefeller Philanthr…California Community …The Chicago Community…Paypal Charitable Giv…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
ImpactassetsincMD15.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Impactassetsinc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The Peterffy Foundation Inc · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · California Community Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Taitanchi Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Taitanchi Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%13%28%50%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
    3report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Taitanchi Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Taitanchi Foundation Inc 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 Taitanchi’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