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

· Public charity

The Center for Reproductive Rights Inc

The center for reproductive rights ("the center") is an international non-governmental organization that uses the power of law to advance reproductive rights as fundamental human rights around the world.

$2.4M
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$206k
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 FY2021–2025.

Civil Rights$1.0MInternational$760kHealth$130kPublic Benefit$125k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 1 grants below total $206,370 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $2,396,319 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $2,189,949 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.

$206,370
Median grant
1
States reached
$112M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CARE INC$206,370
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 (FY22–24, $80k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%The Afiya Center: $50k → 14%LIFT LOUISIANA CO TIDES CENTER: $30k → 23%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

MI
NY
CA
CO
NM
KS
OK
LA
GA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region — $2.2M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 7 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$1.1M · 52% · 22 grants

Stated purpose: PROMOTE RIGHTS & JUSTICE

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$395k · 18% · 10 grants

Stated purpose: PROMOTE RIGHTS & JUSTICE

South Asia$269k · 12% · 6 grants

Stated purpose: PROMOTE RIGHTS & JUSTICE

East Asia and the Pacific$156k · 7% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: PROMOTE RIGHTS & JUSTICE

South America$126k · 6% · 7 grants

Stated purpose: PROMOTE RIGHTS & JUSTICE

Central America and the Caribbean$65k · 3% · 4 grants

Stated purpose: PROMOTE RIGHTS & JUSTICE

Russia and Neighboring States$34k · 2% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: PROMOTE RIGHTS & JUSTICE

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.

58%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.2M · 4 repeat orgs$840k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +45% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.

4 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
13

Total granted

$1.2M
$840k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+45%
0%

Still filing today

100%
85%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25
HealthCivil RightsInternationalPublic BenefitEnvironmentHuman ServicesOther

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

  • COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $760k · revenue +12%
  • CW
    CHANGING WOMAN INITIATIVE
    3× · 2021–2023 · $195k · revenue +45%
  • COMMONSENSE CHILDBIRTH INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $130k · revenue +56%

Funded once

  • CF
    COBALT FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $125k · revenue +125%
  • FP
    FLORIDIANS PROTECTING FREEDOM
    one grant, 2024 · $125k
  • KF
    KANSANS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOM INC
    one grant, 2022 · $100k

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
Cobalt Advocates

Cobalt advocates actualizes policies, structures and attitudes that secure unassailable reproductive autonomy and abortion access utilizing the political process and civic engagement.

—
2
Abortion Care Network

Abortion care network's unique role in the abortion care community is to support independent abortion care providers and the patients they serve. to do so, we provide direct programming, technical assistance and grants directly to our…

Health
3
Pro-Choice Arizona

Pro-Choice Arizona centers abolition and reproductive justice values to prioritize community needs. We advance reproductive equity, pregnancy and family justice, and abortion access for all folks living in Arizona through direct service…

Health
4
The Birth Center

The birth center dba lifecycle wellness and birth center is an independent non-profit organization and free-standing, out-of-hospital birth center. our team of midwives and nurse-practitioners provide empowering gynecology and…

—
5
Pregnancy Justice Inc

Pregnancy justice advances and defends the rights of pregnant people, no matter if they give birth, experience a pregnancy loss, or have an abortion. we advance our mission in four ways: by providing criminal defense, by advocating for…

Civil Rights
6
American Civil Liberties Union of Florida Inc

To promote civil liberties through communication and interaction with and between the citizens and legislators of the state of florida

Civil Rights
7
Ipas

Ipas works globally to advance reproductive justice by expanding access to abortion and contraception.

International
8
Forward Together

Forward Together is a national reproductive justice organization that centers people, families, and communities who experience reproductive oppression. They prioritize queer, trans, Black, Indigenous, and other peoples of color and utilize…

Health
9
Care Net Center of Greater Orleans

Pregnancy counseling

Unclassified
10
Carolina Pregnancy Center

We are a crisis pregnancy center offering assistance to all women with pregnancy related issues.

Health
11
National Network of Abortion Funds Inc

The national network of abortion funds (nnaf) is determined to build a world where all reproductive options are valued, accessible, and stigma-free. we believe all people know how to best care for their own bodies and build their own…

Environment
12
National Institute for Reproductive Health Inc

National institute for reproductive health, inc. works to protect and advance equitable access to reproductive health care by building power at the state and local level. using an approach that is rooted in partnerships with state and…

Civil Rights

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Access Reproductive Care - Southeast and the most unlike its peers is Commonsense Childbirth 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

16 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. 16 of the 18 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
9/16
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC — $759,505 · InternationalCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERY…+1 more — $21,885 · InternationalCHANGING WOMAN INITIATIVE — $194,721 · HealthCHANGING WOMAN INITIATIVECOMMONSENSE CHILDBIRTH INC — $129,814 · HealthCOMMONSENSE CHILDBIRTH IN…THE PRAXIS PROJECT INC — $78,194 · HealthTHE PRAXIS PROJECT INCCOLORADO ORGANIZATION FOR LATINA OPPORTUNITY AND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS — $50,000 · HealthCOLORADO ORGANIZATION FOR…FLORIDIANS PROTECTING FREEDOM — $125,000 · OtherFLORIDIANS PROTECTIN…KANSANS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOM INC — $100,000 · OtherKANSANS FOR CONSTITU…ANCIENT SONG INC — $64,907 · OtherANCIENT SONG INCREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL — $50,000 · OtherREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM…KANSANS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOM INC — $25,000 · OtherKANSANS FOR CONSTITU…COBALT FOUNDATION — $125,000 · Civil RightsCOBALT FOUND…AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF KS — $75,000 · Civil RightsAMERICAN CIV…OKLAHOMA COALITION FOR REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE — $25,000 · Civil RightsOKLAHOMA COA…THE AFIYA CENTER — $50,000 · Human ServicesTIDES CENTER — $30,000 · Human ServicesNEO Philanthropy Inc — $75,000 · Public BenefitACCESS REPRODUCTIVE CARE - SOUTHEAST — $50,000 · Environment
International$781,390Health$452,729Other$364,907Civil Rights$225,000Human Services$80,000Public Benefit$75,000Environment$50,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC — $759,505 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetCHANGING WOMAN INITIATIVE — $194,721 over 3y, 7.2% of budgetCOMMONSENSE CHILDBIRTH INC — $129,814 over 2y, 2.3% of budgetCOBALT FOUNDATION — $125,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetFLORIDIANS PROTECTING FREEDOM — $125,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE PRAXIS PROJECT INC — $78,194 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF KS — $75,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetNEO Philanthropy Inc — $75,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL — $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetACCESS REPRODUCTIVE CARE - SOUTHEAST — $50,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetTHE AFIYA CENTER — $50,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetCOLORADO ORGANIZATION FOR LATINA OPPORTUNITY AND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS — $50,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetTIDES CENTER — $30,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKANSANS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOM INC — $25,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetOKLAHOMA COALITION FOR REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE — $25,000 over 1y, 76% of budgetPHYSICIANS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS INC — $21,885 over 1y, 0.7% 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.

Planned Parenthood Fe…Hopewell FundNew Venture FundRockefeller Philanthr…The Susan Thompson Bu…Groundswell FundRsf Social Finance IncImpactassetsincTides FoundationAmerican Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
Planned Parenthood Federation of America IncNY22× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc · Hopewell Fund · New Venture Fund · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · The Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation · Groundswell Fund · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Impactassetsinc · Tides Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Center for Reproductive Rights Inc 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.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%23%51%90%your share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get 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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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 18 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