Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Grove Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$19M
Granted FY2024still arriving
132
Grants FY2024still arriving
22
States reached
$1.2M
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
0199% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.

Civil Rights$22MHealth$19MCrime & Legal$15MPhilanthropy$15MPublic Benefit$7.3MEducation$6.4MEnvironment$6.2MHuman Services$6.2MOther$0
02FY2024 · 132 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k14 grants · $285k
  • $50k–250k99 grants · $11M
  • $250k+19 grants · $8.1M
$100,000
Median grant
22
States reached
$103M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NEO PHILANTHROPY INC$1,171,400
ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH$780,000
AMALGAMATED FOUNDATION$652,000
INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE INC$647,500
IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER$645,000
ONE ARIZONA$490,000
LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND$350,000
BLACK VOTERS MATTER CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE$340,000
COASTSIDE HOPE$320,000
PUENTE DE LA COSTA SUR$320,000
CALIFORNIA COLLABORATIVE FOR IMMIGRANT JUSTICE$300,000
IFWHENHOW$300,000
COMMUNITY INITIATIVES$270,000
TO NIZHONI ANI$270,000
FORWARD TOGETHER$250,000
02The need
03

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, $15.6M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 29% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL: $160k → 8%TEEN HEALTH MISSISSIPPI: $95k → 23%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL: $145k → 8%ACTIVATE 48 EDUCATION FUND: $100k → 11%HAITIAN BRIDGE ALLIANCE: $155k → 11%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL: $145k → 8%TEEN HEALTH MISSISSIPPI: $80k → 23%ACTIVATE 48 EDUCATION FUND: $100k → 11%BOLD FUTURES NM: $200k → 14%TEEN HEALTH MISSISSIPPI: $80k → 23%BOLD FUTURES NM: $150k → 14%TEEN HEALTH MISSISSIPPI: $80k → 23%PUBLIC ALLIES INC: $160k → 23%TIDES CENTER: $150k → 19%TEWA WOMEN UNITED: $125k → 12%PUBLIC ALLIES INC: $125k → 23%TEWA WOMEN UNITED: $125k → 12%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL INC: $145k → 13%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL INC: $145k → 13%WOMEN'S REFUGEE COMMISSION: $85k → 17%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL INC: $100k → 13%GEORGIA COALITION FOR THE PEOPLES AGENDA: $135k → 13%GEORGIA COALITION FOR THE PEOPLES AGENDA: $100k → 13%IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER: $4.6M → 10%IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER: $705k → 10%IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER: $660k → 10%IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER: $645k → 10%IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER: $643k → 10%IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER: $620k → 10%NUESTRA CASA DE EAST PALO ALTO: $165k → 8%NUESTRA CASA DE EAST PALO ALTO: $150k → 8%NUESTRA CASA DE EAST PALO ALTO: $150k → 8%INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT: $150k → 17%INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT: $85k → 17%INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT: $80k → 17%TIDES CENTER: $120k → 10%CLIMATE RESILIENT COMMUNITIES: $120k → 8%TIDES CENTER: $78k → 10%COASTSIDE HOPE: $320k → 7%COASTSIDE HOPE: $175k → 7%COASTSIDE HOPE: $110k → 7%COASTSIDE HOPE: $100k → 7%PENINSULA FAMILY SERVICE: $90k → 7%PENINSULA FAMILY SERVICE: $80k → 7%STARVISTA: $120k → 7%STARVISTA: $120k → 7%STARVISTA: $120k → 7%STARVISTA: $85k → 7%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 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

NH
WA
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CA
CO
KY
WV
VA
MD
AZ
NM
TN
NC
DC
LA
MS
AL
GA
TX
FL

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.

04

Where the work is directed

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

About 6% of The Grove Foundation’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.

The Grove Foundationlessmore 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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$98M · 175 repeat orgs$11M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +50% since the first grant, against +14% for the ones you funded once.

175 repeat relationships — 108 still active in FY2024, 67 since wound down; 17 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

175
144

Total granted

$98M
$9.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+50%
+14%

Still filing today

90%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.1M went to new ones.

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

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

’17’20’21’22’23’24
Civil RightsHuman ServicesHealthEducationEnvironmentCommunity 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

  • THE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH
    2× · 2017–2020 · $7.5M · revenue +384%
  • NEO Philanthropy Inc
    6× · 2017–2024 · $5.3M · revenue +191%
  • IR
    International Rescue Committee INC
    6× · 2017–2024 · $3.4M · revenue +81%

Funded once

  • DC
    DINE CITIZENS AGAINST RUINING OUR ENVIRONMENT
    one grant, 2022 · $540k · revenue -70% · 38% of their budget
  • JF
    JUST FUTURES IMPACT INC
    one grant, 2023 · $500k
  • CS
    CARDEA SERVICESgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $338k · revenue +31%

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.

1
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
2
American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

The american civil liberties union of northern california (aclu nc union) defends and advances the principles of freedom, equality and justice contained in the united states constitution. aclu nc union, a california mutual benefit…

—
3
California Forward

Ca fwd drives action to identify solutions that can be taken to scale to meet the challenges the state is facing. the organization is driven by the belief that regional solutions across the state will help ensure economic, environmental,…

Public Benefit
4
California Donor Table

California Donor Table anchors a hub of donors, foundations, and community leaders. We pool together our resources to shape California into a truly democratic state that works for the people, not the powerful. Rooted in our commitment to…

Civil Rights
5
California Center for Movement Legal Services

The California Center for Movement Legal Services (Movement Legal) provides legal services in the pursuit of improving the lives of California's traditionally underserved residents, carrying out legal work that fosters community led policy…

Crime & Legal
6
Public Advocates Inc

For more than five decades, public advocates has challenged the systemic causes of poverty and racial discrimination by strengthening community voices in public policy and achieving tangible legal victories advancing education, housing,…

—
7
Legal Link

Legal Link removes legal barriers that prolong poverty by adding critically needed capacity to the legal ecosystem.

Crime & Legal
8
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
9
La Raza Centro Legal - San Francisco

La Raza Centro Legal San Francisco provides high quality, highly trusted, free legal services to low-income or immigrant clients in the San Francisco Bay Area.

—
10
The Alliance for Collective Action

The Alliance for Collective Action convenes leaders of environmental and social movements to advance solutions for a thriving planet. We advance our mission through the Alliance Center building and community, as well as through Collective…

Environment
11
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
12
Asian Pacific Environmental Network

APEN builds immigrant and refugee power for a just transition with local roots and statewide impact so all people can live, work, learn, play and thrive in a clean and healthy environment.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Education Training and Research Associates and the most unlike its peers is Thiebaut Method. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyEnvironmental Conservation …Women & Girls Leadership De…Christian Youth CampsYouth Development ServicesChristian Missionary Organi…Child Abuse Advocacy Servic…Domestic Violence ServicesAffordable Housing Developm…School District FoundationsCancer Support ServicesFood Banks and PantriesHealth Access Advocacy and …Affordable Housing Construc…Community College Foundatio…Policy Research and AdvocacyPregnancy Support ServicesImmigrant Worker SupportCommunity Foundations
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 23 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%5%<5yr14%18%5–10yr19%21%10–20yr16%26%20–35yr13%20%35–55yr16%10%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%3%<5yr14%14%5–10yr19%14%10–20yr16%26%20–35yr13%29%35–55yr16%15%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
1%4/303
the rest of the field
13%
240,392/1,819,262

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

294 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. 294 of the 351 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.

12
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
83
Early backer (in before they grew)
287/294
Grantees still filing
188/294
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH — $3,468,000 · OtherADVOCATES FOR YOUTHInternational Rescue Committee INC — $3,365,000 · OtherInternational Rescue Committee INC+103 more — $38,255,483 · Other+103 moreIMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER — $7,917,500 · Human ServicesIMMIGRANT LEGAL…Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Power and Potential Inc — $840,000 · Human ServicesGeorgia Campaig…COASTSIDE HOPE — $795,000 · Human ServicesNuestra Casa de East Palo Alto — $590,000 · Human Services+19 more — $5,217,500 · Human Services+19 moreTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH — $7,500,000 · HealthTHE MICHAEL J F…PLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE INC — $2,900,000 · HealthPLANNED PARENTH…Forward Together — $800,000 · HealthForward Togethe…TRAILHEAD INSTITUTE — $775,000 · Health+11 more — $2,730,000 · Health+11 moreONE ARIZONA — $1,830,000 · Civil RightsONE ARIZONANATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER — $930,000 · Civil RightsNATIONAL IMM…IFWHENHOW — $800,000 · Civil RightsIFWHENHOWSTATE VOICES — $800,000 · Civil RightsSTATE VOICESSOMOS UN PUEBLO UNIDO — $790,000 · Civil RightsSOMOS UN PUE…MARCH ON MARYLAND — $623,000 · Civil RightsCALIFORNIA IMMIGRANT POLICY CENTER — $570,000 · Civil RightsBVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE INC — $565,000 · Civil RightsTHE TAHIRIH JUSTICE CENTER — $520,000 · Civil RightsNATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC — $435,000 · Civil RightsAPIARY FOR PRACTICAL SUPPORT INC — $420,000 · Civil RightsMI FAMILIA EN ACCION — $420,000 · Civil Rights+17 more — $3,838,000 · Civil Rights+17 moreAmalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc — $3,010,500 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES — $1,607,000 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUNDATION — $830,000 · PhilanthropyGroundswell Fund — $675,000 · PhilanthropyTHE SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION — $650,000 · PhilanthropyJUST FUTURES IMPACT INC — $500,000 · PhilanthropyGRANTMAKERS CONCERNED WITH IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES — $457,500 · PhilanthropySilicon Valley Community Foundation — $370,000 · Philanthropy+1 more — $125,000 · PhilanthropyNEW VENTURE FUND — $1,715,000 · EnvironmentLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND — $1,190,000 · EnvironmentUS CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK — $700,000 · EnvironmentSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC — $675,000 · EnvironmentCOMMUNITIES FOR A BETTER ENVIRONMENT — $575,000 · EnvironmentDINE CITIZENS AGAINST RUINING OUR ENVIRONMENT — $540,000 · EnvironmentCentral California Environmental Justice Network — $500,000 · EnvironmentWest Fund — $415,000 · EnvironmentSustainable Conservation — $285,000 · Environment+4 more — $755,000 · EnvironmentNEO Philanthropy Inc — $5,336,400 · Public BenefitCENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY — $1,215,000 · Public BenefitCATCHAFIRE FOUNDATION — $261,500 · Public Benefit+3 more — $415,000 · Public Benefit
Other$45,088,483Human Services$15,360,000Health$14,705,000Civil Rights$12,541,000Philanthropy$8,225,000Environment$7,350,000Public Benefit$7,227,900

Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetIMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER — $7,917,500 over 6y, 16% of budgetTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH — $7,500,000 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetNEO Philanthropy Inc — $5,336,400 over 6y, 0.9% of budgetADVOCATES FOR YOUTH — $3,468,000 over 6y, 9.3% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC — $3,365,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetAmalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc — $3,010,500 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE INC — $2,900,000 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetONE ARIZONA — $1,830,000 over 5y, 8.1% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND — $1,715,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES — $1,607,000 over 6y, 1.9% of budgetCommunity Legal Services in East Palo Alto Inc — $1,265,000 over 6y, 4.9% of budgetLegal Aid Society of San Mateo County — $1,252,500 over 6y, 6.5% of budgetCENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY — $1,215,000 over 5y, 12% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND — $1,190,000 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC — $965,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetFuture Net Incorporated — $940,000 over 6y, 66% of budgetNATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER — $930,000 over 3y, 3.3% of budgetCALIFORNIA COLLABORATIVE FOR IMMIGRANT JUSTICE — $900,000 over 3y, 17% of budgetPUENTE DE LA COSTA SUR — $895,000 over 6y, 4.3% of budgetJOBTRAIN INC — $875,000 over 6y, 2.4% of budgetIMMIGRATION INSTITUTE OF THE BAY AREA — $870,500 over 5y, 4.8% of budgetGeorgia Campaign for Adolescent Power and Potential Inc — $840,000 over 6y, 4.3% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION — $830,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL URBAN INDIAN FAMILY COALITION — $820,000 over 5y, 6.5% of budgetIFWHENHOW — $800,000 over 4y, 2.7% of budgetForward Together — $800,000 over 5y, 5.9% of budgetSTATE VOICES — $800,000 over 6y, 1.2% of budgetCOASTSIDE HOPE — $795,000 over 6y, 11% of budgetSOMOS UN PUEBLO UNIDO — $790,000 over 5y, 19% of budgetTRAILHEAD INSTITUTE — $775,000 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetUS CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK — $700,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC — $675,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetGroundswell Fund — $675,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetAsian Law Caucus — $674,000 over 5y, 1.5% of budgetTO NIZHONI ANI — $660,000 over 4y, 32% of budgetTHE SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION — $650,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY — $645,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetMARCH ON MARYLAND — $623,000 over 4y, 5.8% of budgetCabrillo College Foundation — $620,000 over 6y, 4.0% of budgetUC LAW SF FOUNDATION — $608,333 over 3y, 5.6% of budgetPENINSULA CONFLICT RESOLUTION CENTER — $601,500 over 4y, 15% of budgetONE EAST PALO ALTO — $600,000 over 5y, 18% of budgetRESIST INC — $600,000 over 3y, 3.4% of budgetCENTER ON RACE POVERTY & THE ENVIRONMENT — $600,000 over 3y, 12% of budgetNuestra Casa de East Palo Alto — $590,000 over 5y, 14% of budgetCOMMUNITIES FOR A BETTER ENVIRONMENT — $575,000 over 3y, 4.3% of budgetCALIFORNIA IMMIGRANT POLICY CENTER — $570,000 over 4y, 6.8% of budgetBVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE INC — $565,000 over 4y, 1.4% of budget
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 IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds THE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH ↗
  • Who funds NEO Philanthropy Inc ↗
  • Who funds ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH ↗
  • Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
  • Who funds Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE INC ↗
  • Who funds ONE ARIZONA ↗
  • Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY INITIATIVES ↗
  • Who funds Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto Inc ↗
  • Who funds Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY ↗
  • Who funds LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND ↗
  • Who funds SOCIAL GOOD FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds Future Net Incorporated ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER ↗
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA COLLABORATIVE FOR IMMIGRANT JUSTICE ↗
  • Who funds PUENTE DE LA COSTA SUR ↗
  • Who funds JOBTRAIN INC ↗
  • Who funds IMMIGRATION INSTITUTE OF THE BAY AREA ↗
  • Who funds Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Power and Potential Inc ↗
  • Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL URBAN INDIAN FAMILY COALITION ↗
  • Who funds IFWHENHOW ↗
  • Who funds Forward Together ↗
  • Who funds STATE VOICES ↗
  • Who funds COASTSIDE HOPE ↗
  • Who funds SOMOS UN PUEBLO UNIDO ↗
  • Who funds TRAILHEAD INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds US CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC ↗
  • Who funds Groundswell Fund ↗
  • Who funds Asian Law Caucus ↗
  • Who funds TO NIZHONI ANI ↗
  • Who funds THE SAN FRANCISCO 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.

Amalgamated Charitabl…The David and Lucile …NEO Philanthropy IncThe San Francisco Fou…Hopewell FundNew Venture FundThe Sobrato Family Fo…Atkinson FoundationMarguerite Casey Foun…Tides FoundationSand Hill FoundationRockefeller Philanthr…
Amalgamated Charitable Foundation IncDC97.6× affinity101 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · NEO Philanthropy Inc · The San Francisco Foundation · Hopewell Fund · New Venture Fund · The Sobrato Family Foundation · Atkinson Foundation · Marguerite Casey Foundation · Tides Foundation · Sand Hill Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc

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 Grove 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 8%
  • Hias Inc — 88% of income from government
  • Casa Inc — 8% of income from government
  • Resist Inc — 2% of income from government
  • Rutgers University Foundation — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
54report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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: 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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 351 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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