How much did THE FUNDERS NETWORK INC grant in FY2025?

THE FUNDERS NETWORK INC reported 15 grants totaling $871,441 in its FY2025 IRS filing.

Where is THE FUNDERS NETWORK INC based?

THE FUNDERS NETWORK INC is based in FL.

THE FUNDERS NETWORK INC

Foundation Dossiers Mostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →

· Public charity

THE FUNDERS NETWORK INC

Tfn's mission is to leverage philanthropy's unique potential to help create communities and regions that are sustainable, prosperous and just for all people.

$871k

Granted FY2025

Grants

Communities

$115k

Largest

01What you fund

0188% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2018–2025.

Philanthropy$3.4MEnvironment$2.6MCommunity Improvement$1.2MReligion$490kHousing & Shelter$369kYouth Development$313kHealth$304kEmployment$205kPublic Benefit$190kOther$2.2M

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2019

urbanwaterinitiativerestorebuffalojusticeprotectlakeswildlife

2020

urbanwaterinitiativerestorewildlifebuffalojusticeprotectlakes

2021

urbanwaterinitiativebuffalojusticeprotectrestorehealthywildlife

2022

foundationsendowmentsgoalbuildingconnectingbettercapital

2023

buildingcapitalbetterconnectingdonorsideascollaboration

2024

foundationsbuildingbettercapitalconnectingideasstrengthen

2025

infrafundplansuppformer

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2025 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

$10k–50k4 grants · $50k
$50k–250k11 grants · $821k

$60,000

Median grant

States reached

$4.3M

Total assets

Largest grants

CITY OF ORLANDO$115,000
FRIENDSHIP HOUSE ASSOCIATION$97,500
ASIAN PACIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK$90,000
CT ROUNDTABLE ON CLIMATE AND JOBS$83,645
CLIMATE JUSTICE HIVE$73,850
CENTER FOR NEIGHBORHOOD TECHNOLOGY$73,472
VOLUNTEERS IMPROVING NBHD ENVIRON$70,000
GES COALITION$60,000
PINELANDS PRESERVATION ALLIANCE$55,000
PROTECT OUR AQUIFER$52,949
WE THE PEOPLE OF DETROIT$50,025
PARTNERSHIP WITH NATIVE AMERICANS$20,000
NEW ENGLAND GRASSROOTS ENVIRON FUND$10,000
COMMUNITY FNDN OF GREATER DUBUQUE$10,000
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION NETWORK$10,000

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $113k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17% — the area typically sits at 11%. 71% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

72%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$8.1M · 56 repeat orgs$3.2M to everyone else

56 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 53 since wound down; 12 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$8.1M

$2.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+87%

+98%

Still filing today

98%

77%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 19% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $704k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EnvironmentPhilanthropyCommunity ImprovementHousing & ShelterEducationYouth DevelopmentOther

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

MC
MONTANA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION
5× · 2019–2024 · $352k · revenue +5%
LISC INDIANAPOLIS
3× · 2018–2020 · $257k · revenue +135%
CF
COMMUNITY FNDN OF GREATER DUBUQUE
8× · 2018–2025 · $253k · revenue +131%

Funded once

HG
HEALTHY GULFgraduated
one grant, 2024 · $180k · revenue +123%
GI
GREENROOTS INCgraduated
one grant, 2024 · $106k · revenue +602%
CC
CULTIVATE CHARLOTTESVILLEgraduated
one grant, 2023 · $90k · revenue +160%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

Green Cities Accord

Green Cities Accord is a nonprofit organization dedicated to fostering climate resilient communities through investments in tree canopy infrastructure to improve environmental health, climate resilience, and equity in communities. We focus…

Environment

Climate Foundation

To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.

Science & Tech

Taproot Earth

Taproot Earth works with communities to support strategies around the use of water, energy and land.

Environment

The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education

Land Conservancy of West Michigan

The Land Conservancy of West Michigan exists to help people protect, enjoy and care for natural land in West Michigan.

Environment

The Alliance for Collective Action

To bring people together to develop and advance solutions for an inclusive, regenerative future.

Environment

CarbonPlan

We work collaboratively to build open tools and resources for the evaluation and deployment of robust climate programs. We share analyses through public communication and collaboration with journalists in order to foster effective climate…

Environment

Earthcorps

To cultivate leaders and community partnerships to advance environmental justice.

International

Climate Access Fund Corporation

The Climate Access Fund develops and finances community solar products that serve low to moderate income households

Environment

Nature for Justice

Mobilize funds and provide the necessary technical resources to leading, in-country organizations working with local, indigenous communities to achieve climate resiliency.

Environment

Cascade Climate Inc

To accelerate progress in interventions that harness Earths natural systems to stabilize the climate.

Environment

Sustainable Conservation

Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Quad Cities Community Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 28 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.8% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.8%1/134

the rest of the field

11%

206,163/1,819,431

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.

05the grantee network

120 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

117/120

Grantees still filing

100/120

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Philanthropy$3,374,950Environment$2,602,753Other$2,854,742Community Improvement$1,245,233Religion$490,000Housing & Shelter$368,735Youth Development$313,300

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.

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.

United States Energy FoundationCA30.7× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United States Energy Foundation · The Energy Foundation · The Kresge Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · Patagoniaorg · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Windward Fund · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Movement Strategy Center · The McKnight Foundation · The Minneapolis 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 organisation THE FUNDERS NETWORK INC 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

10get no government money at all

1rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: BETTER BLOCK HAWAII.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

medium risk

~3 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 4 filed years.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

4 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up +55% since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 465023472 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on BETTER BLOCK HAWAII, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

WatchFinancial stability— Roughly 3 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 79% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to The Funders Network Inc?

Find your warmest path to The Funders Network Inc through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

THE FUNDERS NETWORK INC

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

120 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Funders Network Inc?

More from the funding graph

THE FUNDERS NETWORK INC

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

120 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Funders Network Inc?

More from the funding graph