· Private foundation
The Creatura 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 FY2022–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k20 grants · $59k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $62k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NEO PHILANTHROPY INC | $25,980 |
| Individual grant recipient | $25,095 |
| PHYSICIANS FOR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH | $10,450 |
| Individual grant recipient | $9,717 |
| Individual grant recipient | $7,813 |
| BARNARD COLLEGE | $5,225 |
| PPGNY | $5,225 |
| MedicalStudents for Choice | $5,082 |
| Center for Reproductive Rights | $5,080 |
| PHYSICIANS FOR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH | $4,051 |
| M A Hotline | $2,551 |
| BARNARD COLLEGE | $2,360 |
| Pregnancy Justice | $1,161 |
| Riverside Park Conservancy | $1,161 |
| COMPASSION AND CHOICES | $1,161 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY22–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 97% of your 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 +1% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
4 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 15 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, 41% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $70k 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
- PFPhysicians For Reproductive Health2× · 2023–2024 · $42k · revenue -41%
BARNARD COLLEGE3× · 2022–2024 · $35k · revenue -3%
NEO Philanthropy Inc2× · 2023–2024 · $27k · revenue +1%
Funded once
- RHREPRODUCTIVE HEALTH ACCESS PROJECT INCgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue +69%
- NWNational Women's Health Networkone grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue 0%
- NWNATIONAL WOMEN'S LAW CENTERone grant, 2023 · $1k · revenue -15%
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.
We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world. we take a multidisciplinary, intergenerational, life-cycle approach that contributes to (see schedule o)four global…
Women's law project creates a more just and equitable society by advancing the rights and status of all women throughout their lives. to this end, we engage in high-impact litigation, advocacy, and education. the core values of women's law…
The national institute for reproductive health action fund conducts non-partisan issue advocacy and electoral engagement to advance reproductive health, rights, and justice in states and cities across the country. nirh action fund builds…
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…
Power to decide envisions a world where everyone - no matter who they are or where they live - has control over their bodies and can decide if, when, and under what circumstances to get pregnant and have a child. its mission is to advance…
The institute is a leading research and policy organization committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights in the united states and globally.
The emma goldman clinic is a not-for-profit independent organization founded in 1973 by a group of women driven by feminist ideals. we exist to empower women and men in all life stages through informed decision making, client rights…
Gynuity health projects works to develop and advocate for the use of scientific, clinical and programmatic evidence in reproductive and maternal health, assuring that each individual benefits from the fruits of medical science and…
Engenderhealth envisions a gender-equal world where all people have the agency, resources, and opportunities to live healthy lives.(see schedule o)
The mission of the national abortion federation, inc. (naf) is to unite, represent, serve, and support abortion providers in delivering patient-centered, evidence-based care.
Upper hudson planned parenthood is a community-based non-profit organization providing advocacy, education and reproductive health care services in the capital region of new york state since 1934.
Gender IDEAL launched the Reproductive & Maternal Health Compass. RMH Compass works to support and protect reproductive and maternal health (RMH) benefits for all workers in the U.S. by engaging with employers to assess and expand their…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Reproductive Health Access Project Inc and the most unlike its peers is Sistergood Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
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 23 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 Physicians For Reproductive Health ↗
- Who funds BARNARD COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds NEO Philanthropy Inc ↗
- Who funds MEDICAL STUDENTS FOR CHOICE ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH ACCESS PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds National Women's Health Network ↗
- Who funds COMPASSION & CHOICES ↗
- Who funds PREGNANCY JUSTICE INC ↗
- Who funds RIVERSIDE PARK CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL PARK CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL WOMEN'S LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds SISTERGOOD INC ↗
- Who funds GRACE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL GOOD FUND INC ↗
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization The Creatura 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.
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.