Skip to content
The Cooperative Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

The Cooperative Charitable Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$63k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$63k
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, FY2020 to 2025.

Community Improvement$322kEmployment$49kInternational$8kEducation$6k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$62,915
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$62,915
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 16% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%FORUM EXPENSES: $74k → 8%MERRIMAC VALLEY PROJECT: $1k → 10%ICA GROUP: $10k → 12%COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT INST: $5k → 14%DEMOCRACY AT WORK INSTITUTE: $8k → 10%THE WORKING WORLD: $5k → 17%PARAPROFESSIONAL HEALTHCARE INST: $5k → 28%THE INDUSTRIAL COMMONS: $10k → 13%FEDERATION OF SOUTHERN COOPS: $5k → 13%MANUFACTURING RENAISSANCE: $5k → 14%EMPL0YEE OWNERSHIP EXPANSION: $5k → 7%VERMONT EMPLOYEE OWNERSHIP CTR: $6k → 10%FORUM EXPENSES: $63k → 8%ICA GROUP: $1k → 12%DEMOCRACY AT WORK INSTITUTE: $5k → 10%THE INDUSTRIAL COMMONS: $5k → 13%NASCO: $5k → 14%EOX NETWORK: $5k → 7%FORUM EXPENSES: $62k → 8%MANUFACTURING RENAISSANCE: $3k → 14%EMPLOYEE OWNERSHIP EXPANSION: $5k → 7%FORUM EXPENSES: $43k → 8%FORUM EXPENSES: $33k → 8%FORUM EXPENSES: $6k → 8%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

VT
IL
NY
MA
OH
CA
VA
NC
GA
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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$338k · 6 repeat orgs$47k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +54% since the first grant, against +37% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
10

Total granted

$338k
$47k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+54%
+37%

Still filing today

67%
70%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EmploymentCommunity ImprovementEducationFood & NutritionOther
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

  • TI
    THE INDUSTRIAL COMMONS
    2× · 2020–2021 · $15k · revenue +150%
  • DA
    DEMOCRACY AT WORK INSTITUTE
    2× · 2020–2021 · $13k · revenue +54%
  • TI
    THE ICA GROUP INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $11k · revenue +50%

Funded once

  • VE
    Vermont Employee Ownership Centergraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $6k · revenue +28%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
  • PH
    PARAPROFESSIONAL HEALTHCARE INSTITUTE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +70%
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
Coop Careers Inc

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

Education
2
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
3
Community Cooperative dba Francesco Collaborative

Community Cooperative's mission is to support entrepreneurs and organizations advancing the cooperative and solidarity economy through connection to funding, training, workshops, networks, and resources that foster leadership in the…

Social Science
4
Cooperation L a

The L.A. Co-op Lab is a collective that builds capacity for worker ownership in Los Angeles as a pathway toward a more equitable and democratic economy.

Arts & Culture
5
Cooperative Network

Promote, represent & advocate for the cooperative way of doing business

—
6
National Center for Employee Ownership

To help employee ownership thrive.

—
7
Nyc Nowc Inc

The NYC Network of Worker Cooperatives is dedicated to sharing and cultivating the educational, financial, and technical resources of its members and supporting the growth of worker cooperatives for social and economic justice. We offer…

Community Improvement
8
Structured Employment Economic Development Corporation

Structured employment economic development corporations (seedco) mission is to advance economic opportunity for people, businesses, and communities in need as such, seedco designs and implements innovative programs and services that…

Community Improvement
9
Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation

The neighborhood reinvestment corporation (d.b.a neighborworks america) is a congressionally chartered public non-profit corporation that creates opportunities for people to live in affordable homes, improve their lives, and strengthen…

—
10
Montana Cooperative Development Center Inc

To promote and develop cooperatives to meet the economic needs and community needs of rural montana.

Community Improvement
11
Virginia Maryland and Delaware Association of Electric Cooperatives

Trade association for electric cooperatives

—
12
Carolina Common Enterprise

The specific objectives and purposes of this corporation shall be to assist individuals and communities, particularly those in low-income and socially disadvantaged areas, in the creation, expansion, and improvement of rural and…

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Industrial Commons; the most unlike its peers is Vermont Employee Ownership 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

11 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. 11 of the 16 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $281,231 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTHE ICA GROUP INC: $11,000 · Other+5 more: $33,000 · Other+5 moreTHE INDUSTRIAL COMMONS: $15,000 · EmploymentTHE INDUS…DEMOCRACY AT WORK INSTITUTE: $13,000 · EmploymentDEMOCRACY…PARAPROFESSIONAL HEALTHCARE INSTITUTE INC: $5,000 · EmploymentPARAPROFE…Vermont Employee Ownership Center: $6,000 · EducationNORTH AMERICAN STUDENTS OF COOPERATION: $5,000 · EducationTHE WORKING WORLD INC: $5,000 · Community ImprovementCOOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE INC: $5,000 · Community ImprovementMERRIMACK VALLEY PROJECT INC: $1,000 · Community ImprovementFEDERATION OF SOUTHERN COOPERATIVES: $5,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$325,231Employment$33,000Education$11,000Community Improvement$11,000Food & Nutrition$5,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE INDUSTRIAL COMMONS: $15,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetDEMOCRACY AT WORK INSTITUTE: $13,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetTHE ICA GROUP INC: $11,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetMANUFACTURING RENAISSANCE FKA CENTER FOR LABOR AND COMMUN: $8,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetVermont Employee Ownership Center: $6,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetPARAPROFESSIONAL HEALTHCARE INSTITUTE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNORTH AMERICAN STUDENTS OF COOPERATION: $5,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetTHE WORKING WORLD INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFEDERATION OF SOUTHERN COOPERATIVES: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMERRIMACK VALLEY PROJECT INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.5% 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.

WK Kellogg FoundationAmalgamated Charitabl…ImpactassetsincCooperative Developme…The Kendeda FundRsf Social Finance IncWells Fargo FoundationSilicon Valley Commun…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…
WK Kellogg FoundationMI16.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: WK Kellogg Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Impactassetsinc · Cooperative Development Foundation · The Kendeda Fund · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Wells Fargo Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 Cooperative Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Cooperative Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 58%
  • Cooperative Development Institute Inc: 58% of income from government
  • Vermont Employee Ownership Center: 31% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
3report 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
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 16 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Cooperative’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