Skip to content
The Pixley Hill Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

The Pixley Hill Foundation Inc

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.

$7.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
41
Grants FY2025still arriving
18
States reached
$3.1M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Arts & Culture$8.0MHuman Services$2.8MCivil Rights$1.4MInternational$1.4MPhilanthropy$1.2MHealth$974kRecreation & Sports$955kCrime & Legal$410kOther$0
02FY2025 · 41 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k16 grants · $245k
  • $50k–250k16 grants · $1.3M
  • $250k+7 grants · $5.6M
$50,000
Median grant
18
States reached
$33M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SYMPHONY SPACE INC$3,100,000
THE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC$858,700
THE BRIDGE PROJECT INC$500,000
NATIONAL ABORTION FEDERATION$350,000
INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE$335,000
CENTRAL PARK CONSERVANCY INC$250,000
VERA INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE$250,000
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF LOUISIANA$200,000
COMMUNITY ACCESS$129,500
NEW REACH INC$100,000
GLOBAL IMPACT$100,000
TIDES CENTER$100,000
NEO PHILANTHROPY INC- THE LOUISIANA ALLIANCE PROJECT$75,000
THE LOVELAND FOUNDATION INC$75,000
ABORTION COALITION FOR TELEMEDICINE INC$75,000
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, $3.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%EL SISTEMA USA: $10k → 11%OASIS-A HAVEN FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN: $25k → 12%STEM LIBRARY LAB: $50k → 15%NEWTON'S ATTIC INC: $50k → 15%EL SISTEMA USA: $10k → 11%OASIS-A HAVEN FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN: $15k → 12%BERKSHIRE IMMIGRANT CENTER INC: $15k → 12%MODEST NEEDS FOUNDATIONS: $4k → 17%OASIS-A HAVEN FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN: $10k → 12%BERKSHIRE IMMIGRANT CENTER INC: $15k → 12%OASIS-A HAVEN FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN: $10k → 12%BERKSHIRE IMMIGRANT CENTER: $10k → 12%OASIS-A HAVEN FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN: $10k → 12%BERKSHIRE IMMIGRANT CENTER: $5k → 12%COMMUNITY ACCESS TO THE ARTS: $25k → 12%COMMUNITY ACCESS TO THE ARTS: $2k → 12%ABORTION COALITION FOR TELEMEDICINE INC: $75k → 17%THE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC: $859k → 17%THE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC: $788k → 17%THE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC: $400k → 17%THE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC: $325k → 17%THE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC: $100k → 17%THE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC: $100k → 17%THE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC: $100k → 17%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
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
PA
NJ
CT
CA
CO
MO
KY
VA
MD
NM
KS
NC
SC
DC
LA
MS
GA
TX
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$15M · 43 repeat orgs$2.3M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +51% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

43 repeat relationships: 23 still active in FY2025, 20 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

43
55

Total granted

$15M
$857k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+51%
+13%

Still filing today

86%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.5M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureHealthCivil RightsHuman ServicesEnvironmentEducationOther
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

  • TB
    THE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $2.7M · revenue ×26 · 61% of their budget
  • THE WHARTON INSTITUTE FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $1.7M · revenue +45%
  • IR
    International Rescue Committee INC
    6× · 2019–2025 · $1.3M · revenue +67%

Funded once

  • AF
    ACLU FOUNDATION OF LOUISIANA
    one grant, 2022 · $180k
  • NC
    NATIONAL CENTER FOR JEWISH FILMINC
    one grant, 2019 · $55k · revenue -28%
  • NW
    National Women's Health Network
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue 0%
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
Women's Law Project

Women's law project creates a more just and equitable society by advancing the rights and status of all women throughout their lives. to this end, we engage in high-impact litigation, advocacy, and education. the core values of women's law…

Civil Rights
2
National Institute for Reproductive Health Inc

National institute for reproductive health, inc. works to protect and advance equitable access to reproductive health care by building power at the state and local level. using an approach that is rooted in partnerships with state and…

Civil Rights
3
University Associates in Obstetrics and Gynecology University Faculty Pract ice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
4
Ipas

Ipas works globally to advance reproductive justice by expanding access to abortion and contraception.

International
5
The Population Council Inc

We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world. we take a multidisciplinary, intergenerational, life-cycle approach that contributes to (see schedule o)four global…

International
6
Forward Together

Forward Together is a national reproductive justice organization that centers people, families, and communities who experience reproductive oppression. They prioritize queer, trans, Black, Indigenous, and other peoples of color and utilize…

Health
7
National Network of Abortion Funds Inc

The national network of abortion funds (nnaf) is determined to build a world where all reproductive options are valued, accessible, and stigma-free. we believe all people know how to best care for their own bodies and build their own…

Environment
8
Pregnancy Justice Inc

Pregnancy justice advances and defends the rights of pregnant people, no matter if they give birth, experience a pregnancy loss, or have an abortion. we advance our mission in four ways: by providing criminal defense, by advocating for…

Civil Rights
9
National Women's Law Center

To advance and protect women's legal rights. the center focuses on major policy areas of importance to women and their families including education, employment, family economic security, and health, with special attention given to the…

—
10
Institute for Women's Policy Research

Iwpr champions economic equity for all women and eliminates barriers to their full participation in society. as a leading national think tank, iwpr builds evidence to shape policies that grow women's power and influence, close inequality…

—
11
Public Media Nj Inc

To bring quality public television programs and resources to communities throughout new jersey and its tri-state neighbors. its content, both on-air and online, aims to reflect the diverse

Arts & Culture
12
National Council of Jewish Women Incorporated

The national council of jewish women is a grassroots nonpartisan organization of volunteers and advocates who strive for social justice by improving the quality of life for women, children and families.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Access Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Wharton Institute for the Performing Arts Inc. 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

93 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. 93 of the 117 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
24
Early backer (in before they grew)
91/93
Grantees still filing
61/93
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE SYMPHONY SPACE INC: $5,807,000 · OtherTHE SYMPHONY SPACE INCTHE WHARTON INSTITUTE FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS INC: $1,681,500 · OtherTHE WHARTON INSTITUTE FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS INCNATIONAL ABORTION FEDERATION: $350,000 · OtherVERA INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE INC: $355,000 · Other+69 more: $2,066,000 · Other+69 moreTHE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC: $2,671,200 · Human ServicesTHE BRIGID ALLIANCE…TIDES CENTER: $165,000 · Human Services+8 more: $340,500 · Human Services+8 moreInternational Rescue Committee INC: $1,265,000 · InternationalGlobal Impact: $100,000 · InternationalTHE BRIDGE PROJECT INC: $500,000 · PhilanthropyAmalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc: $250,000 · PhilanthropyWOMEN DONORS NETWORK: $175,000 · PhilanthropyHOPEWELL FUND: $35,000 · Philanthropy+1 more: $10,000 · PhilanthropyCENTRAL PARK CONSERVANCY INC: $955,000 · Recreation & SportsAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF LOUISIANA: $400,000 · Civil RightsMIDWEST ACCESS COALITION: $165,000 · Civil RightsTHE LOVELAND FOUNDATION INC: $85,000 · Civil RightsTHE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC: $62,500 · Civil RightsPROVIDE INC: $45,000 · Civil Rights+6 more: $55,000 · Civil RightsCOMMUNITY ACCESS INC: $129,500 · HealthNational Women's Health Network: $50,000 · HealthABORTION CARE NETWORK: $50,000 · HealthCIRCLE OF HOPE HEALTH CARE SVCS INC: $50,000 · HealthVOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE-BERKSHIRES INC: $30,000 · HealthPlanned Parenthood Gulf Coast Inc: $30,000 · HealthTrust Women Foundation Inc: $30,000 · HealthNAMI National: $30,000 · HealthABORTION ACCESS FOR ALL INC: $25,000 · HealthTHE JED FOUNDATION: $25,000 · HealthHNRNP FAMILY FOUNDATION: $20,000 · Health+4 more: $45,000 · Health
Other$10,259,500Human Services$3,176,700International$1,365,000Philanthropy$970,000Recreation & Sports$955,000Civil Rights$812,500Health$514,500

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 budgetTHE SYMPHONY SPACE INC: $5,807,000 over 7y, 36% of budgetTHE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC: $2,671,200 over 7y, 61% of budgetTHE WHARTON INSTITUTE FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS INC: $1,681,500 over 8y, 20% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $1,265,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetCENTRAL PARK CONSERVANCY INC: $955,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF LOUISIANA: $400,000 over 2y, 5.5% of budgetVERA INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE INC: $355,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetAmalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc: $250,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWOMEN DONORS NETWORK: $175,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetMIDWEST ACCESS COALITION: $165,000 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $165,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY ACCESS INC: $129,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNEW REACH INC: $125,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetGRABHORN INSTITUTE: $115,000 over 3y, 4.3% of budgetGlobal Impact: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CARNEGIE HALL CORPORATION: $99,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE LOVELAND FOUNDATION INC: $85,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetMONMOUTH COUNTY SPCA: $80,005 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetUNITED NEGRO COLLEGE FUND INC: $80,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetOASIS - A HAVEN FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN INC: $70,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC: $62,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE BROTHERHOOD SISTER SOL INC: $60,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetCOLORADO GRAND INC: $55,000 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetNATIONAL CENTER FOR JEWISH FILMINC: $55,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetNYC FIRST Inc: $50,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetNational Women's Health Network: $50,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetABORTION CARE NETWORK: $50,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCENTER OF SOUTHWEST CULTURE INC: $50,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetLAWYERS FOR GOOD GOVERNMENT INC: $50,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetNATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN ST LOUIS SECTION: $50,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT DOCUMENTARY INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCIRCLE OF HOPE HEALTH CARE SVCS INC: $50,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetSTEM LIBRARY LAB: $50,000 over 1y, 5.1% of budgetBERKSHIRE IMMIGRANT CENTER INC: $45,000 over 4y, 4.4% of budgetPROVIDE INC: $45,000 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetGuttmacher Institute Inc: $40,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetHOPEWELL FUND: $35,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNEO Philanthropy Inc: $35,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE-BERKSHIRES INC: $30,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetTHE YOUNG MEN'S AND YOUNG WOMEN'S HEBREW ASSOCIATION: $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCB COMMUNITY SCHOOLS: $30,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetPlanned Parenthood Gulf Coast Inc: $30,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTrust Women Foundation Inc: $30,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetNAMI National: $30,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE CLINIC: $29,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetCOMMUNITY ACCESS TO THE ARTS INC: $26,500 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetCHICAGO ABORTION FUND: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCHELSEA'S FUND: $25,000 over 1y, 2.2% 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.

October Mountain Foun…Hopewell FundNew Venture FundJewish Communal FundSilicon Valley Commun…The San Francisco Fou…Lee Bank Foundation I…The Feigenbaum Founda…Anderson-Rogers Found…The Ford FoundationThe Susan Thompson Bu…The Prentice Foundati…
October Mountain Foundation IncNY34.7× affinity14 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: October Mountain Foundation Inc · Hopewell Fund · New Venture Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Lee Bank Foundation Inc · The Feigenbaum Foundation Inc · Anderson-Rogers Foundation Inc · The Ford Foundation · The Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation · The Prentice Foundation 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 Pixley Hill Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Pixley Hill Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 9%
  • New Reach Inc: 49% of income from government
  • Railroad Street Youth Project Inc: 45% of income from government
  • Volunteers in Medicine-Berkshires Inc: 10% of income from government
  • Berkshire Immigrant Center Inc: 9% of income from government
  • Ibis Reproductive Health Inc: 9% of income from government
  • The Center for Independent Documentary Inc: 6% of income from government
  • National Center for Jewish Filminc: 4% of income from government
  • Community Access to the Arts Inc: 2% of income from government
  • Berkshire Pulse Inc: 1% of income from government
  • Jacob's Pillow Dance Festival Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
17report 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to The Pixley Hill Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to The Pixley Hill Foundation Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

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 117 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 Pixley Hill’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