Skip to content
The Laura L Tiberti Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Laura L Tiberti Charitable 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.

$224k
Granted FY2024still arriving
17
Grants FY2024still arriving
9
States reached
$56k
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.

Environment$368kArts & Culture$112kInternational$101kFood & Nutrition$59kAnimals$54kPublic Benefit$47kCivil Rights$41kHealth$39kOther$0
02FY2024 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k9 grants · $54k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $64k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $106k
$8,000
Median grant
9
States reached
$2.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NEVADA PUBLIC RADIO$56,000
VEGAS PBS$50,000
PARTNERS IN HEALTH$12,000
ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE$12,000
FARM RADIO INTERNATIONAL$10,000
YELLOWSTONE TO YUKON$10,000
DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS$10,000
SEA SHEPARD CONSERVATION SOCIETY$10,000
ECOJUSTICE$8,000
DEMOCRACY NOW$8,000
MENNONITE CENTRAL COMMITTEE$8,000
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$8,000
SEVA FOUNDATION$7,000
SELKIRK COLLEGE FOUNDATION$6,000
OXFAM AMERICA$5,000
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.

US giving: 55% of grant dollars ($477k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 45% that went abroad ($384k) is mapped below.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY24–24, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%PCS FOR PEOPLE'S: $1k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
MT
MN
WI
NY
MA
NV
PA
CA
CO
VA
DC

Beyond the US: 45% of all-years giving ($384k)

1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Canada$384k · 85 grants
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$717k · 33 repeat orgs$125k to everyone else

33 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2024, 21 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

33
16

Total granted

$717k
$57k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+79%
+627%

Still filing today

27%
6%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 69% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $68k 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
InternationalEnvironmentArts & CultureHuman ServicesHealthPhilanthropyOther
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

  • PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION
    7× · 2018–2024 · $48k · revenue +91%
  • Rocky Mountain Institute
    6× · 2017–2024 · $41k · revenue +381%
  • YT
    YELLOWSTONE TO YUKON
    5× · 2020–2024 · $30k · revenue +44%

Funded once

  • KL
    KOOTENEY LAKE HOSPITAL FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2023 · $7k
  • WC
    WATERAID CANADA
    one grant, 2020 · $6k
  • MC
    MID-MAIN COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTRE
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
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
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
2
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
3
NatureServe

NatureServe's mission is to leverage the power of science, data, and technology to guide biodiversity conservation and stewardship. We activate our mission by working with a network of 60+ partners located in states and provinces across…

Environment
4
Climate Catalyst Inc

Climate catalyst sparks collective action to tackle the biggest climate challenges we face today: cutting emissions in heavy industries.

Environment
5
Rainforest Foundation Inc

The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.

Environment
6
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
7
Fsc I&P

Fsc i&p promotes environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable management of the world's forests. this mission aligns with the forest stewardship council (fsc), its network of offices, and other organizations.…

Philanthropy
8
Nature and Culture International

Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.

Environment
9
Wildaid Inc

Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.

Animals
10
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
11
Wildlife Conservation Network Inc

Connect conservationists and supporters, deploy resources to the field, provide conservationists with tools and support they need to succeed.

Animals
12
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Only One Inc; the most unlike its peers is Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation. 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

15 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 54 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)
14/15
Grantees still filing
11/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VEGAS PBS: $50,000 · OtherVEGAS PBSFARM RADIO INTERNATIONAL: $50,000 · OtherFARM RADIO INTERNATIONALRocky Mountain Institute: $41,010 · OtherRocky Mountain InstituteVALHALLA FOUNDATION FOR ECOLOGY AND SOCIAL JUSTICE: $40,000 · OtherVALHALLA FOUNDATION FOR ECOLOGY AND SOCIAL JUSTICEECOJUSTICE: $38,000 · OtherECOJUSTICEPACIFIC WILD ALLIANCE INC: $32,000 · OtherPACIFIC WILD ALLIANCE INCSIERRA CLUB OF BC FOUNDATION: $30,000 · OtherDOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $23,000 · OtherOSPREY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $21,000 · Other+32 more: $249,500 · Other+32 moreNEVADA PUBLIC RADIO: $60,200 · Arts & CultureNEVADA PUBLIC …DEMOCRACY NOW PRODUCTIONS INC: $47,000 · Arts & CultureDEMOCRACY NOW …YELLOWSTONE TO YUKON: $30,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION NW: $20,000 · EnvironmentONLY ONE INC: $2,000 · EnvironmentPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $48,000 · HealthMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $10,000 · InternationalOXFAM-AMERICA INC: $8,000 · InternationalSEVA FOUNDATION: $7,000 · InternationalFELLOWSHIP OF RECONCILIATION INC: $6,000 · InternationalSEA SHEPHERD CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $29,000 · AnimalsRAINCOAST CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $18,000 · PhilanthropyPCS FOR PEOPLE: $1,000 · Human Services
Other$574,510Arts & Culture$107,200Environment$52,000Health$48,000International$31,000Animals$29,000Philanthropy$18,000Human Services$1,000

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 budgetNEVADA PUBLIC RADIO: $60,200 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $48,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetDEMOCRACY NOW PRODUCTIONS INC: $47,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetRocky Mountain Institute: $41,010 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetYELLOWSTONE TO YUKON: $30,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetSEA SHEPHERD CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $29,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCONSERVATION NW: $20,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $19,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetRAINCOAST CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $18,000 over 3y, 2.1% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOXFAM-AMERICA INC: $8,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSEVA FOUNDATION: $7,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFELLOWSHIP OF RECONCILIATION INC: $6,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetPCS FOR PEOPLE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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 NEVADA PUBLIC RADIO ↗
  • Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds DEMOCRACY NOW PRODUCTIONS INC ↗
  • Who funds Rocky Mountain Institute ↗
  • Who funds YELLOWSTONE TO YUKON ↗
  • Who funds SEA SHEPHERD CONSERVATION SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds CONSERVATION NW ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds RAINCOAST CONSERVATION FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds OXFAM-AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds SEVA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds FELLOWSHIP OF RECONCILIATION INC ↗

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.

Jpmorgan Chase Founda…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Jpmorgan Chase FoundationNY11.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Laura L Tiberti Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Laura L Tiberti Charitable Foundation. 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%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation: 0% of income from government
  • Oxfam-America Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
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 54 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Laura L Tiberti’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