Skip to content
The Eurasia Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

The Eurasia Foundation

Eurasia foundation believes societies function best when people take responsibility for their own civic and economic prosperity.

$12M
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$1.1M
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, FY2017 to 2025.

International$2.5MPublic Benefit$2.0MPhilanthropy$1.1MCommunity Improvement$606kArts & Culture$353kEducation$217kEnvironment$107kHousing & Shelter$43kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $1,370,355, the rows itemized in this filing. The $11,595,936 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $10,225,581 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.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $40k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $178k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.1M
$177,786
Median grant
2
States reached
$5.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
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 (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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%HULME RESOURCES INC: $69k → 15%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

ME
WA
MN
IL
NY
OR
IN
OH
NJ
CT
CA
UT
MO
VA
MD
DE
NM
DC
FL

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.

Russia and Neighboring States$10.0M · 99% · 13 grants · 1 person

Stated purpose: DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION · STRENGTHENING CIVIC ENGAGEMENT · INDIVIDUAL GRANTS

Middle East and North Africa$144k · 1% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: SUPPORTING TEACHERS

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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.6M · 12 repeat orgs$1.7M to everyone else

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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
35

Total granted

$4.6M
$1.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+12%
+22%

Still filing today

67%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalEducationCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitArts & CultureYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • OC
    Open Contracting Partnership
    2× · 2024–2025 · $1.6M · revenue +25%
  • II
    International Indigenous Fund For Development and Solidarity Batani
    3× · 2022–2024 · $185k · revenue +446% · 31% of their budget
  • KD
    Keshet Dance Company
    2× · 2020–2023 · $113k · revenue +12%

Funded once

  • TR
    The Research Foundation for The State University of New Yorkgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $74k · revenue +55%
  • EI
    ECPAT-USA INC
    one grant, 2024 · $70k · revenue 0%
  • HW
    HOUSING WORKS INC
    one grant, 2024 · $70k · revenue +0%
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
Institute for State Effectiveness

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…

International
2
The Central European University

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…

International
3
World Learning Inc

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
4
International Consortium of Investigative Journalists Inc

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.

International
5
Chancellor Masters & Scholars of the University of Oxford

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,…

—
6
The International Institute for Strategic Studies - Us

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,…

International
7
Civicus World Alliance for Citizen Participation

Civicus is a global alliance of civil society organisations and activists dedicated to strengthening citizen action and civil society throughout the world.

Youth Development
8
Global Investigative Journalism Network Inc

To support the training and sharing of information among journalists worldwide in investigative and computer-assisted reporting.

Arts & Culture
9
Portulans Institute

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…

Arts & Culture
10
Institute for Eastwest Studies Inc

Eastwest institute (ewi) works to reduce international conflict, addressing seemingly intractable problems that threaten world security and stability. (continued on schedule o)

—
11
Global Policy Forum Inc

Research and education of United Nations activities

International
12
Center for Internationalundersstanding

CIU is an international exchange organization that promotes cultural understanding.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is International Center for Not-for-Profit Law Inc; 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.
04the grantee network

35 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. 35 of the 49 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.

6
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
35/35
Grantees still filing
21/35
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Open Contracting Partnership: $1,625,175 · Public BenefitOpen Contracting Partnershi…+2 more: $86,622 · Public BenefitWOMEN IN DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION LLC: $438,070 · OtherWOMEN IN DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION…NAVANTI GROUP LLC: $434,498 · OtherNAVANTI GROUP LLCSOUTHERN UTAH UNIVERSITY 01-65: $84,616 · OtherBODYWISE DANCE LLC: $69,925 · OtherKeshet Dance Company: $112,695 · OtherKeshet Dance CompanyTHE MUSEUM OF RUSSIAN ART: $69,987 · OtherGRAINS OF GOOD FOUNDATION: $69,080 · OtherHulme Resources Inc: $68,588 · Other+14 more: $573,611 · Other+14 moreSUPPORTERS OF CIVIL SOCIETY INC: $1,387,085 · PhilanthropySUPPORTERS OF CIVIL SO…Global Impact: $721,517 · InternationalGlobal ImpactInternational Indigenous Fund For Development and Solidarity Batani: $185,493 · InternationalInternational Indig…ECPAT-USA INC: $70,000 · InternationalECPAT-USA INCMOBILITY INTERNATIONAL USA: $52,690 · InternationalINTEGRATIVE STRATEGIES FORUM INC: $49,404 · InternationalCOUNCIL OF INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS USA: $49,400 · InternationalCIEE Inc: $44,572 · InternationalVITAL VOICES GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP INC: $42,999 · International+1 more: $8,293 · InternationalCALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY SAN MARCOS CORPORATION: $95,898 · EducationThe Research Foundation for The State University of New York: $74,351 · EducationLOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO: $50,230 · EducationTHE UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT FOUNDATION INC: $42,805 · EducationMISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $40,000 · EducationFOOTAGE FOUNDATION INC: $39,890 · EducationResearch Foundation of the City University of New York: $21,687 · Education+1 more: $5,100 · EducationHOUSING WORKS INC: $70,000 · Community ImprovementCAMBA INC: $55,000 · Community ImprovementDISABILITYIN: $50,000 · Community ImprovementSTREET LAW INC: $48,306 · Community ImprovementINTERNATIONAL JUSTICE ORGANISATION: $102,160 · Civil RightsFOUNDATION FOR DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENT: $49,674 · Civil Rights
Public Benefit$1,711,797Other$1,921,070Philanthropy$1,387,085International$1,224,368Education$369,961Community Improvement$223,306Civil Rights$151,834

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 budgetOpen Contracting Partnership: $1,625,175 over 2y, 12% of budgetSUPPORTERS OF CIVIL SOCIETY INC: $1,387,085 over 5y, 75% of budgetGlobal Impact: $721,517 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetInternational Indigenous Fund For Development and Solidarity Batani: $185,493 over 3y, 31% of budgetKeshet Dance Company: $112,695 over 2y, 6.3% of budgetINTERNATIONAL JUSTICE ORGANISATION: $102,160 over 2y, 76% of budgetCALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY SAN MARCOS CORPORATION: $95,898 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetThe Research Foundation for The State University of New York: $74,351 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetECPAT-USA INC: $70,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetHOUSING WORKS INC: $70,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE MUSEUM OF RUSSIAN ART: $69,987 over 1y, 3.9% of budgetGRAINS OF GOOD FOUNDATION: $69,080 over 1y, 76% of budgetHulme Resources Inc: $68,588 over 1y, 8.6% of budgetCAMBA INC: $55,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMOBILITY INTERNATIONAL USA: $52,690 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetLOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO: $50,230 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPEN AMERICAN CENTER INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetDISABILITYIN: $50,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENT: $49,674 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetINTEGRATIVE STRATEGIES FORUM INC: $49,404 over 1y, 21% of budgetCOUNCIL OF INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS USA: $49,400 over 1y, 21% of budgetSTREET LAW INC: $48,306 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetCIEE Inc: $44,572 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICANS FOR INFORMED DEMOCRACY: $43,685 over 1y, 59% of budgetVITAL VOICES GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP INC: $42,999 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCENTER FOR INDEPENDENT SOCIAL RESEARCH INC: $42,937 over 1y, 41% of budgetTHE UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT FOUNDATION INC: $42,805 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAtlas Service Corps Inc: $42,500 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetMISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $40,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFOOTAGE FOUNDATION INC: $39,890 over 1y, 18% of budgetResearch Foundation of the City University of New York: $21,687 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSTUDENT TELEVISION NETWORK INC: $14,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetINTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR NOT-FOR-PROFIT LAW INC: $8,293 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY: $5,100 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

US Russia Foundation …The Ford FoundationAmerican Endowment Fo…The Pfizer Foundation…The Blackbaud Giving …Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…The Bank of America C…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
US Russia Foundation for Economic Advancement and the Rule of LawDC17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 33%
  • Mobility International Usa: 33% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely 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 49 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 Eurasia’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