Skip to content
The 214 Philanthropic Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

The 214 Philanthropic Foundation Inc

Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$135k
Granted FY2023
7
Grants FY2023
5
States reached
$35k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0187% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

International$142kPhilanthropy$90kHuman Services$81kPublic Safety & Disaster$10kHealth$10kCommunity Improvement$5kEmployment$1kOther$0
02FY2023 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k2 grants · $11k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $125k
$25,199
Median grant
5
States reached
$1.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FIDELITY CHARITABLE GIFT FUND$35,039
ENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS USA$27,574
Individual grant recipient$27,012
Individual grant recipient$25,199
NEADS$10,057
SOCIAL VENTURE PARTNERS BOSTON$5,500
WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN$5,000
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 (FY17–23, $80k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 88% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%HOUSEHOLD GOODS: $10k → 8%NEADS: $30k → 11%NEADS: $10k → 11%NEADS: $10k → 11%NEADS: $5k → 11%NEADS: $5k → 11%NEADS: $5k → 11%NEADS: $5k → 11%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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$340k · 7 repeat orgs$37k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2023, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
6

Total granted

$340k
$37k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+38%
+43%

Still filing today

71%
83%

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
InternationalHuman ServicesPhilanthropyRecreation & SportsEmploymentOther
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

  • EW
    ENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS-USAINC
    7× · 2017–2023 · $132k · revenue +51%
  • NI
    NEADS INC
    7× · 2017–2023 · $70k · revenue +53%
  • IR
    International Rescue Committee INC
    3× · 2021–2023 · $10k · revenue +38%

Funded once

  • HG
    HOUSEHOLD GOODS INC
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +16%
  • U
    UMBRELLA
    2× · 2017–2018 · $10k
  • DW
    DOC WAYNE INCgraduated
    4× · 2017–2023 · $10k · revenue +196%
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
Devworks International

Devworks international is dedicated to a society where all people enjoy the freedom to pursue their own sustainable development. we contribute to this by strengthening the capacity of local organizations.

Human Services
2
Common Impact Inc

Common impact's mission is to strengthen the capacity of social change organizations, enabling them to better run and scale their programs. through its partnership with companies, common impact taps into the business skills and expertise…

Unclassified
3
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
4
Chief Executives for Corporate Purpose Inc

Chief executives for corporate purpose (cecp) is the only business counsel and network dedicated to driving measurable returns on purpose. we promote responsible purpose-driven business as it increases customer loyalty, builds employee…

Philanthropy
5
Upwardly Global

Upwardly global removes employment barriers for immigrant, refugee, and asylee professionals while advancing the inclusion of their skills into the u.s. economy.

Employment
6
Enterprise Community Investment Inc

All our efforts support our strategic goals to increase housing supply, advance racial equity and build resilience and upward mobility.the organization raises private capital through investment and by forming effective partnerships.…

Housing & Shelter
7
Coop Careers Inc

Building a movement of diverse, upwardly mobile college grads overcoming underemployment through digital skills and peer connections.

Education
8
Commonwealth Care Alliance Inc

Commonwealth care alliance, inc.'s mission is to improve the health and well-being of people with significant needs by innovating, coordinating and providing the highest quality, individualized care.

Health
9
Ceres Inc

Ceres is a nonprofit advocacy organization working to accelerate the transition to a cleaner, more just, and resilient world. through education and research, we make the business case for action on the most pressing sustainability…

Environment
10
Global Communities

Global communities brings together local ingenuity and global insights to save lives and secure strong futures.

International
11
Waterorg

Water.org's goal is to bring safe water and sanitation to the world through access to small, affordable loans.

International
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Girls Who Code Inc; the most unlike its peers is International Rescue Committee Inc. 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

12 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. 12 of the 14 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
10/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS-USAINC: $132,004 · InternationalENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS-USAINCInternational Rescue Committee INC: $10,000 · InternationalInternational Rescue Committee INCWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $10,000 · InternationalWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INCIndividual grant recipient: $35,199 · OtherIndividual grant recip…Individual grant recipient: $32,012 · OtherIndividual grant recip…UMBRELLA: $10,000 · OtherUMBRELLACOMPASS WORKING CAPITAL INC: $5,000 · OtherCOMPASS WORKING CAPITA…NEADS INC: $70,322 · Human ServicesNEADS INCHOUSEHOLD GOODS INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesHOUSEHOLD GOODS INC+1 more: $1,000 · Human ServicesSOCIAL VENTURE PARTNERS BOSTON INC: $50,500 · PhilanthropySOCIAL VENTUR…FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $39,539 · Community ImprovementFIDELITY I…DOC WAYNE INC: $9,955 · Recreation & SportsSTRIVE INTERNATIONAL INC: $1,000 · Employment
International$152,004Other$82,211Human Services$81,322Philanthropy$50,500Community Improvement$39,539Recreation & Sports$9,955Employment$1,000

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 budgetENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS-USAINC: $132,004 over 7y, 0.4% of budgetNEADS INC: $70,322 over 7y, 0.8% of budgetSOCIAL VENTURE PARTNERS BOSTON INC: $50,500 over 7y, 3.5% of budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $39,539 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $10,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHOUSEHOLD GOODS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetDOC WAYNE INC: $9,955 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetCOMPASS WORKING CAPITAL INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSTRIVE INTERNATIONAL INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGIRLS WHO CODE INC: $1,000 over 2y, 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.

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.

Boston Foundation IncNational Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Boston Foundation IncMA13.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Boston Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 The 214 Philanthropic Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The 214 Philanthropic Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Doc Wayne Inc: 15% of income from government
  • Neads Inc: 1% of income from government
  • Compass Working Capital Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get 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
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
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 14 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on 214 Philanthropic’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