Skip to content
The German Marshall Fund of the United States at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

The German Marshall Fund of the United States

THE GERMAN MARSHALL FUND OF THE UNITED STATES (gmf) strives to champion democratic values and the transatlantic alliance by strengthening civil society, forging bold and innovative policy ideas, and developing a new generation of leaders to tackle global challenges.

$9.2M
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$150k
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 2024.

Public Benefit$589kInternational$393kSocial Science$206kPhilanthropy$150kEducation$100kCivil Rights$25k
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $325,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $9,166,853 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $8,841,853 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 · FY2024

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $88k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $238k
$87,500
Median grant
3
States reached
$198M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FARM JOURNAL AGRICULTURAL FOUNDATION$150,000
FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS INC$87,500
AMERICAN COUNCIL OF GERMANY$45,833
AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY GERMAN STUDIES$41,667
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 97% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%HARVARD UNIVERSITY: $50k → 8%FARM JOURNAL AGRICULTURAL FOUNDATION: $150k → 22%AMERICAN COUNCIL OF GERMANY: $46k → 17%CENTER FOR NEW AMERICAN SECURITY: $103k → 14%TEACHING CLEVELAND FOUNDATION: $10k → 17%MACWILLIAMS SANDERS COMMUNICATION: $170k → 19%AMERICAN COUNCIL ON GERMANY: $25k → 17%FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS INC: $88k → 14%AMERICAN COUNCIL ON GERMANY: $25k → 17%CENTER FOR A NEW AMERICAN SECURITY (CNAS): $82k → 14%AMERICAN COUNCIL ON GERMANY: $25k → 17%FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS USAFMC: $52k → 14%AMERICAN COUNCIL ON GERMANY: $25k → 17%THE ASSOCIATION OF FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS: $50k → 14%AMERICAN COUNCIL ON GERMANY: $23k → 17%THE ASSOCIATION OF FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS: $50k → 14%AMERICAN COUNCIL ON GERMANY: $20k → 17%THE ASSOCIATION OF FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS: $50k → 14%AMERICAN COUNCIL ON GERMANY: $20k → 17%THE ASSOCIATION OF FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS: $50k → 14%THE ORGANIZED CRIME AND CORRUPTION REPORTING PROJECT: $40k → 14%THE ASSOCIATION OF FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS: $40k → 14%FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS USAFMC: $39k → 14%AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY GERMAN STUDIES: $42k → 14%AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY GERMAN STUDIES: $25k → 14%AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY GERMAN STUDIES: $25k → 14%AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY GERMAN STUDIES: $25k → 14%AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY GERMAN STUDIES: $25k → 14%AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY GERMAN STUDIES: $25k → 14%AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY GERMAN STUDIES: $20k → 14%AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY GERMAN STUDIES: $20k → 14%FOUNDATION FOR DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENT: $25k → 14%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.

Grants abroad, by region: $8.7M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions, $8.6M to organizations and $76k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$5.0M · 57% · 202 grants · 5 people

Stated purpose: DEMOCRACY BUILDING / SUPPORT FOR CIVIL SOCIETY

Russia and Neighboring States$3.7M · 43% · 184 grants · 3 people

Stated purpose: DEMOCRACY BUILDING / SUPPORT FOR CIVIL SOCIETY

H$7k · 0% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: DEMOCRACY BUILDING / SUPPORT FOR CIVIL SOCIETY

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.

72%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.0M · 4 repeat orgs$395k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +89% since the first grant, against +56% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
4

Total granted

$1.0M
$245k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+89%
+56%

Still filing today

100%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 54% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $150k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalEducationPublic BenefitSocial ScienceCivil RightsPhilanthropyOther
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

  • FM
    FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
    8× · 2017–2024 · $419k · revenue +90%
  • AC
    AMERICAN COUNCIL ON GERMANY INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $208k · revenue +84%
  • CF
    Center for a New American Security Inc
    2× · 2021–2022 · $185k · revenue +89%

Funded once

  • MS
    MACWILLIAMS SANDERS COMMUNICATION
    one grant, 2022 · $170k
  • JD
    JOURNALISM DEVELOPMENT NETWORK INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $40k · revenue +56%
  • FF
    FOUNDATION FOR DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENT
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue -70%
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
Foreign Policy Research Institute

The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…

International
2
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
3
Council On Foreign Relations Inc

The council on foreign relations (cfr) is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business executives, journalists, educators and…

International
4
Hudson Institute Inc

Hudson Institute is a research organization promoting American leadership for a secure, free, and prosperous future.

—
5
Center for Strategic and International Studies

The center for strategic and international studies (csis) is a bipartisan, nonprofit policy research organization dedicated to advancing practical ideas to address the world's greatest challenges.

International
6
Franklin Center for Global Policy Exchange

Founded in 1978, the Franklin Center for Global Policy Exchange (Franklin Center) is a non-partisan, non-profit 501(c)(3) organization committed to enhancing global understanding of important international issues. The Franklin Center…

—
7
Institute for New Global Politics Inc

The Institute for New Global Politics is a California-based educational nonprofit corporation organized and operated exclusively for charitable purposes. It is an independent and nonpartisan thinktank dedicated to educating the general…

International
8
Fdd Action

FDD Action is a non-profit, non-partisan 504(c)4 organization established to advocate for effective policies to promote U.S. National Security and defend free nations.

Community Improvement
9
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research

The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…

Social Science
10
Center for Global Development

Reduce global poverty and improve lives through innovative economic research that drives better policy and practice by the world's top decision makers. we focus on the intersection of developing countries and the governments, institutions…

Human Services
11
Open Markets Institute

The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.

Education
12
Institute for Defense Analyses

The institute for defense analyses is organized for the purpose of applied research. the institute for defense analyses provides independent and objective scientific and technological expertise to assist national security decision-makers…

Science & Tech
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Former Members of Congress; the most unlike its peers is The Teaching Cleveland Foundation. 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

9 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. 9 of the 10 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS: $418,750 · Public BenefitFORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESSAMERICAN COUNCIL ON GERMANY INC: $208,334 · InternationalAMERICAN COUNCIL ON GERMANY IN…Center for a New American Security Inc: $185,038 · InternationalCenter for a New American Secu…American-German Institute Inc: $206,251 · Social ScienceAmerican-German…MACWILLIAMS SANDERS COMMUNICATION: $170,400 · OtherMACWILLIAMS S…Farm Journal Agricultural Foundation: $150,000 · PhilanthropyFarm Journa…President and Fellows of Harvard College: $50,000 · EducationJOURNALISM DEVELOPMENT NETWORK INC: $40,000 · EducationTHE TEACHING CLEVELAND FOUNDATION: $10,000 · EducationFOUNDATION FOR DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENT: $24,999 · Civil Rights
Public Benefit$418,750International$393,372Social Science$206,251Other$170,400Philanthropy$150,000Education$100,000Civil Rights$24,999

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS: $418,750 over 8y, 2.4% of budgetAMERICAN COUNCIL ON GERMANY INC: $208,334 over 8y, 2.3% of budgetAmerican-German Institute Inc: $206,251 over 8y, 1.8% of budgetCenter for a New American Security Inc: $185,038 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetFarm Journal Agricultural Foundation: $150,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJOURNALISM DEVELOPMENT NETWORK INC: $40,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENT: $24,999 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetTHE TEACHING CLEVELAND FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 4.7% 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.

American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
American Online Giving Foundation IncDE5.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 German Marshall Fund of the United States funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The German Marshall Fund of the United States. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report 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 10 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on German Marshall Fund of the United States’ 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