Skip to content
The Center for Reproductive Rights Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· 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 it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

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

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $206,370, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,396,319 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $2,189,949 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$206,370
Median grant
1
States reached
$112M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CARE INC$206,370
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 (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 its 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
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

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

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. 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

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

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +45% since the first grant, against 0% for those 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
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

  • 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 +51%

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
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
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
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
3
Ibis Reproductive Health Inc

Ibis reproductive health drives change through bold, rigorous research and principled partnerships that advance sexual and reproductive autonomy, choices and health worldwide.

Health
4
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
5
Ipas

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

International
6
Reproductive Freedom for All Foundation

Reproductive freedom for all foundation's mission is to develop and sustain a constituency that uses the political process to guarantee every woman the right to make personal decisions regarding the full range of reproductive choices,…

—
7
Abortion Care Network

Abortion care network's (acn) 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 (continue on…

Health
8
Global Justice Center

Global justice center is a legal human rights organization that uses international law to achieve gender equality and dismantle systems of oppression.

Civil Rights
9
Reproductive Freedom for All

Reproductive freedom for all's mission is to develop and sustain a constituency that uses the political process to guarantee every woman the right to make personal decisions regarding the full range of reproductive choices, including…

Human Services
10
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Florida Inc

To defend the civil liberties of the residents in the state of florida

Civil Rights
11
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
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Access Reproductive Care - Southeast; the most unlike its peers is The Afiya Center. 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 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. 16 of the 18 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
9/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and 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 grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's 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 budgetOKLAHOMA COALITION FOR REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE: $25,000 over 1y, 76% of budgetKANSANS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOM INC: $25,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetPHYSICIANS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS INC: $21,885 over 1y, 0.7% 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.

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

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 Center for Reproductive Rights Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Center for Reproductive Rights Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%23%51%90%funder's 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
    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 18 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Center for Reproductive Rights’ 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