· Public charity
The Eurasia Foundation
Eurasia foundation believes societies function best when people take responsibility for their own civic and economic prosperity.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 4 grants below total $1,370,355 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $11,595,936 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $10,225,581 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
- Under $10k1 grant · $8k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $40k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $178k
- $250k+1 grant · $1.1M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| OPEN CONTRACTING PARTNERSHIP | $1,144,444 |
| WOMEN IN DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION LLC | $177,786 |
| GLOBAL IMPACT | $39,832 |
| INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR NOT-FOR-PROFIT LAW | $8,293 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY24–24, $69k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those 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
Grants abroad, by region — $10M on the FY2025 return
Schedule F, as filed: 2 regions, $10M to organizations and $7k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION · STRENGTHENING CIVIC ENGAGEMENT · INDIVIDUAL GRANTS
Stated purpose: SUPPORTING TEACHERS
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.
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.
12 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k 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
- OCOpen Contracting Partnership2× · 2024–2025 · $1.6M · revenue +25%
- IIInternational Indigenous Fund For Development and Solidarity Batani3× · 2022–2024 · $185k · revenue +446% · 31% of their budget
- KDKeshet Dance Company2× · 2020–2023 · $113k · revenue +12%
Funded once
- TRThe Research Foundation for The State University of New Yorkgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $74k · revenue +55%
- EIECPAT-USA INCone grant, 2024 · $70k · revenue 0%
- HWHOUSING WORKS INCone grant, 2024 · $70k · revenue +0%
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.
The institute for state effectiveness seeks to close the governance gap and advance inclusive growth so that states and markets deliver to citizens. ise advances practical approaches to strengthen capacity for transformation, through…
Ceu is committed to promoting the values of open society and self-reflective critical thinking. it aims at excellence in the mastery of established knowledge, courage to pursue the creation of new knowledge in the humanities, the social…
Creating a more sustainable, peaceful, and just world through education, development, and exchange since 1932. as both an accredited academic institution and an international ngo, world learning, inc. offers the best of theory and practice…
International consortium of investigative journalists, inc.'s (icij) mission is to show people how the world really works through stories that rock the world; forcing positive change.
The principal objects of the University are the advancement of learning by teaching and research, and its dissemination by every means. We work as one Oxford bringing together our staff, students and alumni, our colleges, faculties,…
To provide accurate, objective information and analysis on international strategic issues for legislators, diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business leaders, economists, the military, defense commentators, journalists,…
Civicus is a global alliance of civil society organisations and activists dedicated to strengthening citizen action and civil society throughout the world.
To support the training and sharing of information among journalists worldwide in investigative and computer-assisted reporting.
To develop cross-community knowledge and dialogue on how people, technology and innovation contribute to sustainable and inclusive growth; to inform policy-makers, by producing independent, rigorous metrics and data-based research; to…
Eastwest institute (ewi) works to reduce international conflict, addressing seemingly intractable problems that threaten world security and stability. (continued on schedule o)
Research and education of United Nations activities
CIU is an international exchange organization that promotes cultural understanding.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is International Center for Not-for-Profit Law Inc and the most unlike its peers is International Indigenous Fund for Development and Solidarity Batani. 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.
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 27 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
35 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. 35 of the 49 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 Open Contracting Partnership ↗
- Who funds SUPPORTERS OF CIVIL SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds Global Impact ↗
- Who funds International Indigenous Fund For Development and Solidarity Batani ↗
- Who funds Keshet Dance Company ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE ORGANISATION ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY SAN MARCOS CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds The Research Foundation for The State University of New York ↗
- Who funds ECPAT-USA INC ↗
- Who funds HOUSING WORKS INC ↗
- Who funds THE MUSEUM OF RUSSIAN ART ↗
- Who funds GRAINS OF GOOD FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Hulme Resources Inc ↗
- Who funds CAMBA INC ↗
- Who funds MOBILITY INTERNATIONAL USA ↗
- Who funds LOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds PEN AMERICAN CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds DISABILITYIN ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENT ↗
- Who funds INTEGRATIVE STRATEGIES FORUM INC ↗
- Who funds COUNCIL OF INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS USA ↗
- Who funds STREET LAW INC ↗
- Who funds CIEE Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICANS FOR INFORMED DEMOCRACY ↗
- Who funds VITAL VOICES GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT SOCIAL RESEARCH INC ↗
- Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Atlas Service Corps Inc ↗
- Who funds PARTNERSHIPS FOR NATURE ↗
- Who funds MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
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.
Open a dossier: US Russia Foundation for Economic Advancement and the Rule of Law · The Ford Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · 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 Eurasia 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.
- Mobility International Usa — 33% of income from government
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.