· Private foundation
The Blackrock Charitable Foundation
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
- $50k–250k17 grants · $1.9M
- $250k+25 grants · $36M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BREAKTHROUGH ENERGY CATALYST FOUNDATION | $20,000,000 |
| US-JAPAN COUNCIL | $2,500,000 |
| THE COMMIT PARTNERSHIP (TX) | $2,000,000 |
| BUILD COMMONWEALTH INC | $2,000,000 |
| NYC KIDS RISE INC | $1,500,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE | $1,000,000 |
| SPARTANBURG ACADEMIC MOVEMENT (SC) | $750,000 |
| PARTNERS FOR RURAL IMPACT INC (NATIONAL) | $750,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $592,895 |
| PER SCHOLAS (NC) | $500,000 |
| BUILD COMMONWEALTH INC | $500,000 |
| VOLUNTEER FLORIDA FOUNDATION | $500,000 |
| LEARN TO EARN DAYTON (OH) | $500,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $286,898 |
| Individual grant recipient | $267,687 |
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 (FY21–24, $450k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% 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 +32% since the first grant, against +7% for the ones you funded once.
25 repeat relationships — 16 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 22 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, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $11M 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
- PSPER SCHOLAS INC5× · 2020–2024 · $6.5M · revenue +178%
- EGECHOING GREEN INC4× · 2020–2023 · $1.3M · revenue +32%
- PTPURSUIT TRANSFORMATION COMPANY INC4× · 2020–2023 · $1.1M · revenue +38%
Funded once
- FFFOUNDATION FOR INNOVATIVE NEW DIAGNOSTICSone grant, 2022 · $5.0M
- TGThe Global FoodBanking Networkone grant, 2021 · $2.4M · revenue -44%
DUKE UNIVERSITYone grant, 2021 · $2.3M · revenue +1%
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.
Improve the food value chain in developing countries by mobilizing corporate volunteers to share knowledge and expertise with small and growing food processors.
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…
Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.
United way's mission is to end intergenerational poverty in our region by harnessing, leveraging and strategically investing the collective power of donors, advocates and volunteers, to help individuals and families break the cycle of…
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
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…
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…
For over 60 years, counterpart international has partnered with communities worldwide to turn local ideas into lasting solutions, connecting local vision with global opportunity. (continued on schedule o)we believe people closest to the…
Our mission is to solve hunger in central pennsylvania by ensuring that everyone struggling with hunger has access to enough wholesome food every day. we will achieve this bold goal with the help of our generous donors, volunteers and…
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.
Making our government work better is a daunting task, and we are a small organization seeking to transform a government that employs millions of civilians and manages trillions of dollars in taxpayer revenue needed to protect public…
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Aspen Institute Inc and 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.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 25 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
49 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. 49 of the 80 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 Breakthrough Energy Catalyst Foundation ↗
- Who funds GENERATION YOU EMPLOYED INC ↗
- Who funds Build Commonwealth Inc ↗
- Who funds PER SCHOLAS INC ↗
- Who funds FINANCIAL HEALTH NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds US- JAPAN COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds The Global FoodBanking Network ↗
- Who funds DUKE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds LABORATORIA INC ↗
- Who funds NYC KIDS RISE INC ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds ECHOING GREEN INC ↗
- Who funds PURSUIT TRANSFORMATION COMPANY INC ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds UPWARDLY GLOBAL ↗
- Who funds SPARTANBURG ACADEMIC MOVEMENT ↗
- Who funds ONE ACRE FUND ↗
- Who funds NPOWER INC ↗
- Who funds COMPASS WORKING CAPITAL INC ↗
- Who funds VOLUNTEER FLORIDA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds COOP Careers Inc ↗
- Who funds UNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds LEARN TO EARN DAYTON ↗
- Who funds BLACK ECONOMIC ALLIANCE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds 3STRANDS GLOBAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BIPARTISAN POLICY CENTER INC ↗
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: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Wells Fargo Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Blue Meridian Partners Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Rockefeller Foundation · Tides Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Workday Foundation · Citi Foundation · The Prudential Foundation · New Profit Inc
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 The Blackrock Charitable Foundation 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.
- Food Bank of Delaware Inc — 26% of income from government
- Greater Boston Food Bank Inc — 22% of income from government
- Homefront Inc — 9% of income from government
- Volunteer Florida Foundation Inc — 2% of income from government
- Compass Working Capital Inc — 1% of income from government
- Year Up Inc — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Blackrock Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Blackrock Charitable Foundation 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.