Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

The Brookings Institution

THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION (brookings) is a nonprofit public policy organization that conducts in-depth, independent research that leads to new ideas for solving problems facing society at the local, national, and global level.

$4.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
21
Grants FY2025still arriving
10
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2022–2025.

International$2.4MScience & Tech$1.5MEducation$1.4MSocial Science$1.1MCommunity Improvement$714kHealth$317kHousing & Shelter$295kPublic Benefit$150kOther$0
02FY2025 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 21 grants below total $1,375,045 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $4,522,561 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $3,147,516 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k9 grants · $358k
  • $50k–250k12 grants · $1.0M
$55,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$572M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITIES GPS LLC$200,000
RM DONAHUE CONSULTING$116,925
THE URBAN INSTITUTE$113,213
NATIONAL CORPORATE HOUSING INC$95,228
ROWAN UNIVERSITY$73,105
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE$72,500
WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN ST LOUIS$61,422
GALLUP INC$59,000
WHITEHEAD ADVISORY SERVICES LLC$58,998
LINCOLN INSTITUTE OF LAND POLICY$56,400
THE HOWARD UNIVERSITY$55,000
AMERICAN UNIVERSITY$54,916
URBAN LEAGUE OF LOUISIANA$43,334
CINCINNATI USA REGIONAL CHAMBER$43,334
GREATER ST LOUIS INC FOUNDATION$43,334
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY22–25, $140k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 79% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%PROSPER FOUNDATION: $67k → 16%CHILD TRENDS INC: $15k → 8%PROSPER FOUNDATION: $43k → 16%CHILD TRENDS INC: $15k → 8%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

WA
MN
MI
NY
MA
IA
OH
NJ
CA
CO
MO
VA
MD
DC
AL
GA
TX

Grants abroad, by region — $1.9M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 6 regions, $1.8M to organizations and $77k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$833k · 43% · 7 grants · 1 person

Stated purpose: PROGRAM ACTIVITY · FELLOWSHIP STIPENDS

South Asia$299k · 16% · 2 grants · 1 person

Stated purpose: PROGRAM ACTIVITY · FELLOWSHIP STIPENDS

South America$252k · 13% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: PROGRAM ACTIVITY

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$200k · 10% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: PROGRAM ACTIVITY

North America (Canada and Mexico)$174k · 9% · 2 grants · 1 person

Stated purpose: PROGRAM ACTIVITY · FELLOWSHIP STIPENDS

Middle East and North Africa$168k · 9% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: PROGRAM ACTIVITY

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$7.6M · 32 repeat orgs$408k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +8% since the first grant, against -2% for the ones you funded once.

32 repeat relationships — 19 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

32
6

Total granted

$7.6M
$408k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
-2%

Still filing today

69%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
EducationCommunity ImprovementSocial ScienceHuman ServicesPublic BenefitInternationalOther

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

  • RF
    RESULTS FOR DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $2.4M · revenue +8%
  • CF
    CENTER FOR ECONOMIC INCLUSION
    2× · 2023–2024 · $504k · revenue +36%
  • TN
    The New School
    2× · 2022–2023 · $375k · revenue +1%

Funded once

  • EA
    ECONOMIC ARCHITECTURE
    one grant, 2023 · $150k
  • AE
    AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH
    one grant, 2024 · $102k · revenue +11%
  • LI
    Lawfare Institute
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -2%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Lehigh University

The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…

Education
2
University of New Haven

The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…

Education
3
Boston Architectural College

The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.

—
4
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
5
Furman University

The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.

Education
6
Golden Gate University

Golden gate university prepares individuals to lead and serve by providing high quality, practice-based educational programs in law, taxation, business and related professions - as a nonprofit institution - in an innovative and challenging…

Education
7
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
8
Capital University

Capital university transforms lives by empowering an inclusive community of learners through engaging academic, co-curricular, and professional experiences.

Education
9
Point Park University

Provides innovative education in a dynamic urban setting. dedicated to academic excellence and community engagement,we prepare students of diverse backgrounds with the knowledge, skill,and experience to lead meaningful lives as informed…

—
10
The Brookings Institution

The brookings institution (brookings) is a nonprofit public policy organization that conducts in-depth, independent research that leads to new ideas for solving problems facing society at the local, national, and global level.…

Social Science
11
Manhattanville University

To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.

Education
12
The Trustees of Princeton University

Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The George Washington University and the most unlike its peers is Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyCommunity FoundationsHealth Access Advocacy and …Affordable Housing Developm…Community College Foundatio…Policy Research and Advocacy
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 51 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number20%6%<5yr14%3%5–10yr18%16%10–20yr18%3%20–35yr16%31%35–55yr15%41%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value20%4%<5yr14%8%5–10yr18%41%10–20yr18%2%20–35yr16%16%35–55yr15%30%55yr+

The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
3%1/40
the rest of the field
12%
1,600/12,961

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.

04the grantee network

31 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. 31 of the 40 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
30/31
Grantees still filing
17/31
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

RESULTS FOR DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE INC — $2,388,873 · InternationalRESULTS FOR DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE …Global Impact — $90,000 · InternationalCITIES GPS LLC — $440,000 · OtherCITIES GPS LLCRM DONAHUE CONSULTING — $329,925 · OtherRM DONAHUE CONSULTINGGallup Inc — $236,000 · OtherGallup IncFIN BUSINESS LLC — $234,000 · OtherFIN BUSINESS LLCNATIONAL CORPORATE HOUSING INC — $170,324 · OtherNATIONAL CORPORATE HOUSING INCREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT SAN DIEGO — $125,000 · OtherWHITEHEAD ADVISORY SERVICES LLC — $117,996 · OtherGREATER RICHMOND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $110,000 · OtherGREATER AKRON CHAMBER — $110,000 · OtherTHE CIVIC COUNCIL OF GREATER KANSAS CITY — $110,000 · OtherCINCINNATI USA REGIONAL CHAMBER — $110,000 · OtherROWAN UNIVERSITY — $102,773 · OtherINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE — $97,500 · Other+4 more — $177,410 · Other+4 moreThe New School — $375,000 · EducationThe New SchoolAMERICAN UNIVERSITY — $259,603 · EducationAMERICAN UNIVERSITYTHE HOWARD UNIVERSITY — $220,000 · EducationTHE HOWARD UNIVERSIT…WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY — $161,711 · EducationWASHINGTON UNIVERSIT…The George Washington University — $130,000 · EducationThe George Washingto…LINCOLN INSTITUTE OF LAND POLICY — $112,800 · EducationLINCOLN INSTITUTE OF…New York University — $80,000 · EducationNew York UniversityEmory University — $51,000 · Education+3 more — $95,842 · Education+3 moreCENTER FOR ECONOMIC INCLUSION — $504,318 · Community ImprovementCENTER FOR…ENTERPRISE COMMUNITY PARTNERS INC — $125,000 · Community ImprovementENTERPRISE…GREATER ST LOUIS INC FOUNDATION — $110,000 · Community ImprovementGREATER ST…NEIGHBORHOOD PROGRESS INC — $50,000 · Community ImprovementNEIGHBORHO…THE URBAN INSTITUTE — $480,358 · Social ScienceAMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH — $102,182 · Social ScienceECONOMIC ARCHITECTURE — $150,000 · Public BenefitLawfare Institute — $50,000 · Public BenefitPROSPER FOUNDATION — $110,000 · Human ServicesCHILD TRENDS INC — $30,000 · Human Services
International$2,478,873Other$2,470,928Education$1,485,956Community Improvement$789,318Social Science$582,540Public Benefit$200,000Human Services$140,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetRESULTS FOR DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE INC — $2,388,873 over 3y, 2.7% of budgetTHE URBAN INSTITUTE — $480,358 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetThe New School — $375,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN UNIVERSITY — $259,603 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE HOWARD UNIVERSITY — $220,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY — $161,711 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetECONOMIC ARCHITECTURE — $150,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetThe George Washington University — $130,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetENTERPRISE COMMUNITY PARTNERS INC — $125,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLINCOLN INSTITUTE OF LAND POLICY — $112,800 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetGREATER RICHMOND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $110,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetGREATER ST LOUIS INC FOUNDATION — $110,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetGREATER AKRON CHAMBER — $110,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetTHE CIVIC COUNCIL OF GREATER KANSAS CITY — $110,000 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetPROSPER FOUNDATION — $110,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetCINCINNATI USA REGIONAL CHAMBER — $110,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetAMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH — $102,182 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE — $97,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGlobal Impact — $90,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNew York University — $80,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEmory University — $51,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNEIGHBORHOOD PROGRESS INC — $50,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetGRANDMONT ROSEDALE DEVELOPMENT CORP — $50,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetLawfare Institute — $50,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetYOUNG 1OVE FOUNDATION — $41,900 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY FOUNDATION — $41,409 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED WAY OF CENTRAL IOWA — $34,510 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCHILD TRENDS INC — $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA — $29,433 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College — $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

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.

The Kresge FoundationJohns Hopkins Univers…Silicon Valley Commun…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Kresge FoundationMI12.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Kresge Foundation · Johns Hopkins University · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Brookings Institution 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 22%
  • Child Trends Inc — 50% of income from government
  • Enterprise Community Partners Inc — 22% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 40 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines