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

· Private foundation

The Grove Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$34M
Granted FY2025still arriving
128
Grants FY2025still arriving
19
States reached
$1.9M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Civil Rights$22MHealth$19MCrime & Legal$15MPhilanthropy$15MPublic Benefit$7.3MEducation$6.4MEnvironment$6.2MHuman Services$6.2MOther$0
02FY2025 · 128 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k7 grants · $170k
  • $50k–250k72 grants · $8.7M
  • $250k+49 grants · $25M
$170,000
Median grant
19
States reached
$70M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH$1,900,000
IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER$1,035,000
NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER$1,000,000
PUENTE DE LA COSTA SUR$1,000,000
INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE - NORTHERN CALIFORNIA$925,000
COASTSIDE HOPE$900,000
NEO PHILANTHROPY INC$775,000
EYES OPEN IOWA$750,000
CARDEA$750,000
RESIST INC (BIRTH CENTER EQUITY)$750,000
SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY$750,000
GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL$725,000
TIDES CENTER$650,000
THE FOUNDATION FOR CITY COLLEGE$600,000
FAITH IN ACTION BAY AREA$575,000
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 (FY17–25, $19.9M) 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. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%HAITIAN BRIDGE ALLIANCE: $155k → 11%WORKMONEY FOUNDATION INC: $150k → 17%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL: $725k → 8%HAITIAN BRIDGE ALLIANCE: $120k → 11%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL: $160k → 8%PUBLIC ALLIES INC: $160k → 23%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL: $145k → 8%PUBLIC ALLIES INC: $125k → 23%ACTIVATE 48 EDUCATION FUND: $100k → 11%BOLD FUTURES NM: $200k → 14%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL: $145k → 8%ACTIVATE 48 EDUCATION FUND: $100k → 11%AL OTRO LADO: $115k → 11%TIDES CENTER: $150k → 19%BOLD FUTURES NM: $150k → 14%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL INC: $145k → 13%CENTRAL VALLEY IMMIGRANT INTEGRATION COLLABORATIVE: $125k → 19%TEWA WOMEN UNITED: $125k → 12%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL INC: $145k → 13%TEWA WOMEN UNITED: $125k → 12%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL INC: $100k → 13%TEWA WOMEN UNITED: $125k → 12%GEORGIA COALITION FOR THE PEOPLES AGENDA: $135k → 13%GEORGIA COALITION FOR THE PEOPLES AGENDA: $100k → 13%GEORGIA COALITION FOR THE PEOPLES AGENDA: $100k → 13%IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER: $4.6M → 10%IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER: $1.0M → 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%COASTSIDE HOPE: $320k → 7%COASTSIDE HOPE: $175k → 7%CLIMATE RESILIENT COMMUNITIES: $315k → 8%COASTSIDE HOPE: $110k → 7%COASTSIDE HOPE: $100k → 7%NUESTRA CASA DE EAST PALO ALTO: $188k → 8%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%TIDES CENTER: $120k → 10%CLIMATE RESILIENT COMMUNITIES: $120k → 8%STARVISTA: $120k → 7%STARVISTA: $120k → 7%STARVISTA: $120k → 7%COASTSIDE HOPE: $900k → 7%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

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
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.
04

Where the work is directed

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

About 6% of The Grove Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Grove Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$126M · 187 repeat orgs$15M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +48% since the first grant, against +12% for those funded once.

187 repeat relationships: 100 still active in FY2025, 87 since wound down; 21 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

187
149

Total granted

$126M
$9.8M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+48%
+12%

Still filing today

91%
68%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4.8M went to new ones.

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

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

’17’20’21’22’23’24’25
Civil RightsHuman ServicesHealthEducationEnvironmentCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • THE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH
    2× · 2017–2020 · $7.5M · revenue +578%
  • NEO Philanthropy Inc
    7× · 2017–2025 · $6.1M · revenue +191%
  • IR
    International Rescue Committee INC
    7× · 2017–2025 · $3.8M · revenue +81%

Funded once

  • DC
    DINE CITIZENS AGAINST RUINING OUR ENVIRONMENT
    one grant, 2022 · $540k · revenue -33% · 38% of their budget
  • JF
    JUST FUTURES IMPACT INC
    one grant, 2023 · $500k
  • CS
    CARDEA SERVICESgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $338k · revenue +31%
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
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Education Training and Research Associates; 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.
05the grantee network

304 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. 304 of the 374 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.

15
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
87
Early backer (in before they grew)
297/304
Grantees still filing
191/304
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH: $5,368,000 · OtherADVOCATES FOR YOUTHInternational Rescue Committee INC: $3,765,000 · OtherInternational Rescue Committee INC+102 more: $50,592,150 · Other+102 moreIMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER: $8,952,500 · Human ServicesIMMIGRANT LEGAL …COASTSIDE HOPE: $1,695,000 · Human ServicesCOASTSIDE HOPEGeorgia Campaign for Adolescent Power and Potential Inc: $1,565,000 · Human ServicesGeorgia Campaign…TIDES CENTER: $1,072,500 · Human ServicesNuestra Casa de East Palo Alto: $777,500 · Human Services+18 more: $6,300,000 · Human Services+18 moreONE ARIZONA: $2,355,000 · Civil RightsONE ARIZONANATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER: $1,930,000 · Civil RightsNATIONAL IMMIG…SOMOS UN PUEBLO UNIDO: $960,000 · Civil RightsSTATE VOICES: $880,000 · Civil RightsIFWHENHOW: $800,000 · Civil RightsCALIFORNIA IMMIGRANT POLICY CENTER: $755,000 · Civil RightsTHE TAHIRIH JUSTICE CENTER: $720,000 · Civil RightsCIVIL RIGHTS EDUCATION AND ENFORCEMENT CENTER: $685,000 · Civil RightsAPIARY FOR PRACTICAL SUPPORT INC: $670,000 · Civil RightsARIZONA COALITION FOR CHANGE: $640,000 · Civil RightsMARCH ON MARYLAND: $623,000 · Civil Rights+22 more: $7,013,000 · Civil Rights+22 moreTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH: $7,500,000 · HealthTHE MICHAEL …PLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE INC: $2,900,000 · HealthPLANNED PARE…TRAILHEAD INSTITUTE: $950,000 · HealthTRAILHEAD IN…Forward Together: $800,000 · HealthBLACK WOMEN FOR WELLNESS: $695,000 · HealthCALIFORNIA LATINAS FOR REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE: $600,000 · Health+7 more: $1,952,500 · Health+7 moreAmalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc: $3,412,500 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES: $1,607,000 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUNDATION: $1,240,000 · PhilanthropyGroundswell Fund: $1,175,000 · PhilanthropyGRANTMAKERS CONCERNED WITH IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES: $757,500 · PhilanthropyTHE SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $750,000 · PhilanthropyJUST FUTURES IMPACT INC: $500,000 · PhilanthropySilicon Valley Community Foundation: $370,000 · Philanthropy+1 more: $300,000 · PhilanthropyFuture Net Incorporated: $1,690,000 · EducationSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $1,130,000 · EducationONE EAST PALO ALTO: $1,060,000 · EducationTHE FOUNDATION FOR CITY COLLEGE: $1,050,000 · EducationCabrillo College Foundation: $870,000 · EducationUC LAW SF FOUNDATION: $773,333 · EducationTO NIZHONI ANI: $660,000 · EducationNEW AMERICAN LEADERS INC: $525,000 · EducationRUTGERS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $500,000 · EducationACT for Women and Girls: $442,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY FOUNDATION: $320,000 · Education+2 more: $520,000 · EducationNEO Philanthropy Inc: $6,111,400 · Public BenefitCENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY: $1,565,000 · Public BenefitCATCHAFIRE FOUNDATION: $531,500 · Public Benefit+2 more: $390,000 · Public Benefit
Other$59,725,150Human Services$20,362,500Civil Rights$18,031,000Health$15,397,500Philanthropy$10,112,000Education$9,540,333Public Benefit$8,597,900

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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 budgetIMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER: $8,952,500 over 7y, 16% of budgetTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH: $7,500,000 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetNEO Philanthropy Inc: $6,111,400 over 7y, 0.9% of budgetADVOCATES FOR YOUTH: $5,368,000 over 7y, 23% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $3,765,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetAmalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc: $3,412,500 over 6y, 1.0% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE INC: $2,900,000 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetONE ARIZONA: $2,355,000 over 6y, 8.1% of budgetNATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER: $1,930,000 over 4y, 4.3% of budgetPUENTE DE LA COSTA SUR: $1,895,000 over 7y, 14% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $1,715,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetCOASTSIDE HOPE: $1,695,000 over 7y, 15% of budgetFuture Net Incorporated: $1,690,000 over 7y, 100% of budgetCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES: $1,607,000 over 6y, 1.9% of budgetGeorgia Campaign for Adolescent Power and Potential Inc: $1,565,000 over 7y, 4.3% of budgetCENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY: $1,565,000 over 6y, 12% of budgetLegal Aid Society of San Mateo County: $1,422,500 over 7y, 6.5% of budgetSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $1,395,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetCommunity Legal Services in East Palo Alto Inc: $1,385,000 over 7y, 4.9% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $1,240,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $1,190,000 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetGroundswell Fund: $1,175,000 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $1,130,000 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetCALIFORNIA COLLABORATIVE FOR IMMIGRANT JUSTICE: $1,120,000 over 4y, 17% of budgetNATIONAL URBAN INDIAN FAMILY COALITION: $1,120,000 over 6y, 10% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $1,072,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetONE EAST PALO ALTO: $1,060,000 over 6y, 18% of budgetTHE FOUNDATION FOR CITY COLLEGE: $1,050,000 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetIMMIGRATION INSTITUTE OF THE BAY AREA: $1,020,500 over 6y, 4.8% of budgetSOMOS UN PUEBLO UNIDO: $960,000 over 6y, 19% of budgetTRAILHEAD INSTITUTE: $950,000 over 6y, 1.0% of budgetPENINSULA CONFLICT RESOLUTION CENTER: $911,500 over 5y, 22% of budgetFaith In Action Bay Area: $900,000 over 4y, 16% of budgetSTATE VOICES: $880,000 over 7y, 1.2% of budgetJOBTRAIN INC: $875,000 over 6y, 2.4% of budgetCabrillo College Foundation: $870,000 over 7y, 4.0% of budgetForward Together: $800,000 over 5y, 5.9% of budgetRESTORATIVE JUSTICE FOR OAKLAND YOUTH RJOY: $800,000 over 4y, 11% of budgetIFWHENHOW: $800,000 over 4y, 2.7% of budgetHUMAN RIGHTS FIRST: $785,000 over 5y, 1.1% of budgetNuestra Casa de East Palo Alto: $777,500 over 6y, 14% of budgetUC LAW SF FOUNDATION: $773,333 over 4y, 5.6% of budgetGRANTMAKERS CONCERNED WITH IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES: $757,500 over 7y, 2.6% of budgetCALIFORNIA IMMIGRANT POLICY CENTER: $755,000 over 5y, 6.8% of budgetTHE SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $750,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetTHE TAHIRIH JUSTICE CENTER: $720,000 over 7y, 1.3% of budgetHOUSING LEADERSHIP COUNCIL OF SAN MATEO COUNTY: $710,000 over 7y, 17% of budgetUS CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK: $700,000 over 2y, 13% 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.

  • 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 NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER ↗
  • Who funds PUENTE DE LA COSTA SUR ↗
  • Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
  • Who funds COASTSIDE HOPE ↗
  • Who funds Future Net Incorporated ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY INITIATIVES ↗
  • Who funds Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Power and Potential Inc ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY ↗
  • Who funds Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County ↗
  • Who funds SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY ↗
  • Who funds Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto Inc ↗
  • Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND ↗
  • Who funds Groundswell Fund ↗
  • Who funds SOCIAL GOOD FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA COLLABORATIVE FOR IMMIGRANT JUSTICE ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL URBAN INDIAN FAMILY COALITION ↗
  • Who funds TIDES CENTER ↗
  • Who funds ONE EAST PALO ALTO ↗
  • Who funds THE FOUNDATION FOR CITY COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds IMMIGRATION INSTITUTE OF THE BAY AREA ↗
  • Who funds SOMOS UN PUEBLO UNIDO ↗
  • Who funds TRAILHEAD INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds PENINSULA CONFLICT RESOLUTION CENTER ↗
  • Who funds Faith In Action Bay Area ↗
  • Who funds STATE VOICES ↗
  • Who funds JOBTRAIN INC ↗
  • Who funds Cabrillo College Foundation ↗

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.

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

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%6%25%56%100%funder's 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
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 374 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-PF 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 Grove’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