· Private foundation
The Ivm 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2022–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k21 grants · $45k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $30k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MDI BIOLOGICAL LABORATORY | $50,000 |
| WINNAKEE LAND TRUST | $10,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER NEW YORK | $10,000 |
| SCENIC HUDSON | $10,000 |
| ASTOR SERVICES - ADOPT-A-FAMILY | $6,000 |
| RIVERKEEPER | $5,000 |
| PS21 | $5,000 |
| BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY | $3,000 |
| CHILDREN'S CANCER RESEARCH FUND | $3,000 |
| THOMAS COLE HISTORIC NATIONAL SITE | $3,000 |
| OLANA STATE HISTORICAL SITE | $3,000 |
| CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA FOUNDATION | $3,000 |
| HUDSONIA LTD | $2,000 |
| NO KID HUNGRY | $1,000 |
| RAMAPO FOR CHILDREN | $1,000 |
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.
Your US giving — 2% of grant dollars ($264k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 98% that went abroad ($17M) is mapped below.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY22–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 99% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
Beyond the US — 98% of all-years giving ($17M)
1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +30% since the first grant, against -23% for the ones you funded once.
14 repeat relationships — 14 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $33k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- WLWINNAKEE LAND TRUST INC2× · 2023–2024 · $35k · revenue +335%
- P2PS 21 INC2× · 2023–2024 · $10k · revenue +176%
- TCTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA FOUNDATION2× · 2023–2024 · $6k · revenue +30%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $17M
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $10k
- RSRHINEBECK SCIENCE FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2023 · $2k · revenue -23%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
The mission of the hudson river foundation is to inspire and inform action through science and engaging people to enhance the hudson river, estuary, and watershed (see schedule o).
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
The new york botanical garden is a museum of plants and a scientific research center devoted to the study of plants and their uses. it is the garden's mission to improve public understanding of the natural world, horticulture, and the…
The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.
New york restoration project ("nyrp") believes that nature is a fundamental right of every new yorker. nyrp works collaboratively with residents in communities across the five boroughs to renovate gardens, restore parks, plant trees,…
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
As a new york city based nonprofit, we're dedicated to transforming the health and well-being of our communities through inclusive and accessible running experiences, empowering all to achieve their potential.
Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.
National public radio, inc. ("npr") works collaboratively with member public radio station licensees ("member stations") to create a more informed public, one that is challenged and invigorated by a deeper understanding and appreciation of…
The natural areas conservancy champions urban natural areas in new york city and across the nation through innovative research, partnerships, and advocacy. we increase the health and resilience of urban forests and wetlands, catalyze…
See schedule onylcv is a non-partisan policy making and political action organization that works to make environmental protection a top priority with elected officials, decision-makers and the voters by evaluating incumbent performance and…
Zoo new york, by example and action, provides knowledge and motivation for conserving nature in new york state through science-based natural and cultural experiences.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ramapo for Children Inc and the most unlike its peers is Ps 21 Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
14 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. 14 of the 30 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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.
- Who funds WINNAKEE LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds Scenic Hudson Inc ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds PS 21 INC ↗
- Who funds THE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RIVERKEEPER INC ↗
- Who funds BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S CANCER RESEARCH FUND ↗
- Who funds CARY INSTITUTE OF ECOSYSTEM STUDIES INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds RHINEBECK SCIENCE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds FRESH AIR FUND ↗
- Who funds REGIONAL FOOD BANK OF NORTHEASTERN NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds RAMAPO FOR CHILDREN INC ↗
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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Ivm 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.
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.