How much did THE FUTURES PROJECT grant in FY2025?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 62% of THE FUTURES PROJECT’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

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

2018

fullfilling foundation's

2019

fullfilling foundation's

2021

fufilling foundations

2022

fufilling foundations

2023

fufilling foundations

2024

fufilling foundations

2025

fufilling foundations

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

03FY2025 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$10,000

Median grant

States reached

Total assets

Largest grants

BuildOn$15,000
Play Marin$10,000
EBCLC$10,000
Huckelberry Youth$10,000
SeriousFun$10,000
Compass$10,000
Inside Circle$10,000
FARMpreneurs$10,000
Hoops Homework$10,000
826 Valencia$10,000
CYO Camp$10,000
Homeless Prenatal$10,000
Cristo Rey Boston$10,000
St Francis Solano$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 (FY17–24, $90k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10% — the area typically sits at 10%. 67% 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.

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 83% of THE FUTURES PROJECT’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 73% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 14% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

THE FUTURES PROJECTlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

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.

44%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$451k · 16 repeat orgs$580k to everyone else

16 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$451k

$520k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+73%

+108%

Still filing today

25%

46%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 59% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $60k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesEducationCrime & LegalInternationalYouth DevelopmentCommunity ImprovementOther

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

buildOn
6× · 2017–2025 · $68k · revenue +39%
8V
826 Valencia
4× · 2018–2025 · $40k · revenue +73%
C
Corazon
3× · 2017–2023 · $30k · revenue +10%

Funded once

U
UNDOCUFUND
one grant, 2017 · $16k
VISION TO LEARNgraduated
one grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +151%
RH
ROBIN HOOD
one grant, 2018 · $10k

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.

Jobs with Justice San Francisco

A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…

Employment

Legal Link

Legal Link removes legal barriers that prolong poverty by adding critically needed capacity to the legal ecosystem. We embed legal navigation support in community-based settings by training and supporting frontline partners.

Crime & Legal

Inner City Law Center

Fighting for justice and housing by providing legal representation for the homeless and working poor.

Crime & Legal

Oakland Kids First

Oakland Kids First is a community-based nonprofit in Oakland, CA that empowers young people to reimagine broken systems and organize for equitable public schools by providing youth leadership development, youth organizing, and community…

Youth Development

Family Violence Law Center

Family Violence Law Center ("FVLC") helps diverse communities in Alameda County heal from domestic violence and sexual assault, advocating for justice and healthy relationships. We provide survivor-centered legal and crisis intervention…

Crime & Legal

Asian Americans Advancing Justice -

The mission of AAAJ-ALC is to promote, advance, and represent the legal and civil rights of Asian Pacific Islander (API) communities, recognizing that social, economic, political and racial inequalities continue to exist in the United…

Crime & Legal

Legal Aid Association of California

LAAC is the statewide membership of civil legal nonprofits. We serve our community and their clients by advocating for more legal aid funding, by training legal aid staff, and by coordinating and connecting advocates throughout the state.

—

San Francisco Casa

San Francisco CASA (formerly San Francisco Court Appointed Special Advocates) transforms the lives of systems-involved and other vulnerable children, young adults and their families by providing consistent, caring volunteer advocates…

Civil Rights

Equal Justice Center

The Equal Justice Center is a non-profit law firm and employment justice organization which empowers low-income families, workers, and communities to achieve fair treatment in the workplace, in the justice system, and in our shared society…

Civil Rights

Alternatives Inc

Youth agency providing comprehensive services for youth, their families and community.

Health

Legal Assistance to the Elderly

LAE's mission is to protect and advance the right of San Franciscos seniors and adults with disabilities to be housed, healthy, financially stable, and safe. We provide free legal services to San Francisco seniors and adults with…

Crime & Legal

Asian Immigrant Women Advocates Inc

Asian Immigrant Women Advocates empowers low-income, limited English speaking immigrant women and youth through education, leadership development and civic participation programs.

Human Services

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Compass Family Services and the most unlike its peers is Larkin Street Youth Services. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 23 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 10% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/34

the rest of the field

10%

3,841/39,423

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.

06the grantee network

32 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)

31/32

Grantees still filing

28/32

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$672,952International$97,800Education$90,000Human Services$90,000Crime & Legal$40,000Youth Development$20,000Community Improvement$20,000

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.

The San Francisco FoundationCA19.8× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The San Francisco Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The California Wellness Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · Bothin Foundation · The James Irvine Foundation · Tipping Point Community · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund · The California Endowment · East Bay Community Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Weinreb Pilecki Segal 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 FUTURES PROJECT 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.

2025

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

0get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%

typical government reliance, FY20–25

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: FARM TO PANTRY.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~7 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 5.6× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 465321538 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 FARM TO PANTRY, 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

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 7 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 5% of their budget — diversified.
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 Futures Project?

Find your warmest path to The Futures Project 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 FUTURES PROJECT

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?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

32 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Futures Project?

More from the funding graph

THE FUTURES PROJECT

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?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

32 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Futures Project?

More from the funding graph