· Private foundation
The Prentice Foundation Inc
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 FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k111 grants · $482k
- $10k–50k104 grants · $1.8M
- $50k–250k4 grants · $414k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ASPEN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $150,000 |
| MARGARET BYRD RAWSON INSTITUTE INC | $130,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL DOCUMENTARY ASSOCIATION | $80,000 |
| AS YOU SOW | $54,245 |
| CLIMATE DEMOCRACY INITIATIVE | $45,000 |
| PENNSYLVANIA VOICE | $45,000 |
| ONE ARIZONA | $45,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC | $40,000 |
| THE JEMICY SCHOOL INC | $40,000 |
| NATIONAL WOMENS HEALTH NETWORK INC | $40,000 |
| PROGRESSNOW COLORADO EDUCATION | $40,000 |
| THE ALLIANCE FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION | $38,000 |
| RURAL ARIZONA ENGAGEMENT | $35,000 |
| MSI US | $33,555 |
| INTERNATIONAL DOCUMENTARY ASSOCIATION | $30,000 |
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 human-services grants (FY20–24, $548k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 71% of those 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
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 Prentice Foundation Inc’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.
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.
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 +37% since the first grant, against +10% for the ones you funded once.
263 repeat relationships — 149 still active in FY2024, 114 since wound down; 40 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, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $573k 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
- TMTHE MARGARET BYRD RAWSON INSTITUTE INC5× · 2020–2024 · $547k · revenue +60% · 100% of their budget
ONE ARIZONA5× · 2020–2024 · $350k · revenue +57%- TAThe Alliance For Collective Action5× · 2020–2024 · $313k · revenue +16%
Funded once
- MCMaine Citizens for Clean Electionsone grant, 2020 · $120k · revenue +0%
- A4ACTIVATE 48 EDUCATION FUNDone grant, 2023 · $60k · revenue -44%
- PMPOPULATION MEDIA CENTER INCone grant, 2021 · $59k · revenue -11%
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.
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
To encourage, promote, support, and elect pro-choice women of all political parties to all levels of public office in minnesota.
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…
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
The ACLU Foundation of Texas is the unyielding guardian and promoter of freedom, justice, equality and dignity of all people, particularly for those who are still fighting to secure the full exercise of their civil rights and liberties.…
Preservation of civil liberties through litigation and public education.
To develop and promote a carbon dividends framework - based on carbon fees whose revenues are rebated to citizens through dividends - as the most cost-effective, equitable, and politically viable climate solution.
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…
Dedicated to the early detection and prevention of cervical cancer around the globe for the women who need it most.
Equality florida institute is the educational arm of the largest civil rights organization in florida dedicated to ending discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
Pro publica is an independent, non-profit, pulitzer prize-winning newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest. our work focuses exclusively on truly important stories. [see continuation on schedule o] we produce…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is As You Sow and the most unlike its peers is Young Chances Foundations. 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.
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 27 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.7% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
429 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. 429 of the 467 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
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
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 THE MARGARET BYRD RAWSON INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds ASPEN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ONE ARIZONA ↗
- Who funds The Alliance For Collective Action ↗
- Who funds National Women's Health Network ↗
- Who funds THE LITTLE LIGHTHOUSE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PA Alliance Foundation ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds PENNSYLVANIA VOICE ↗
- Who funds AS YOU SOW ↗
- Who funds RURAL ARIZONA ENGAGEMENT ↗
- Who funds THE JEMICY SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds PROGRESSNOW COLORADO EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds JANE'S DUE PROCESS INC ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MARYLAND INC ↗
- Who funds PROGRESS FLORIDA EDUCATION INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds Maine Citizens for Clean Elections ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL DOCUMENTARY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GOODPOWER EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD SOUTH ATLANTIC INC ↗
- Who funds Progress Texas Institute ↗
- Who funds The McCombs School of Business Foundation ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF FLORIDA INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA ALLIANCE EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Journalism Funding Partners ↗
- Who funds Trust Women Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds IFWHENHOW ↗
- Who funds CAPITAL OF TEXAS PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds THE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds FLORIDA ALLIANCE FOR CIVIC ENGAGEMENT INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN - AUSTIN ↗
- Who funds AUSTIN TRINITY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF MIAMI INC ↗
- Who funds CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO PUBLIC SCHOOL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Educational Programs for the International Community ↗
- Who funds SUSTAINABLE FOOD CENTER ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS LILITH FUND ↗
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.
Open a dossier: The Educational Foundation of America · Hopewell Fund · NEO Philanthropy Inc · The Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation · National Network of Abortion Funds Inc · New Venture Fund · Women Donors Network · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Triangle Community Foundation Inc · United States Energy Foundation · Windward Fund · Wallace Global Fund II
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 Prentice Foundation Inc 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Portland Va Research Foundation — 34% of income from government
- Gang Alternative Inc — 34% of income from government
- Fit Kids of America Corp — 23% of income from government
- Planned Parenthood of Southern New England Inc — 10% of income from government
- Casa Inc — 8% of income from government
- Planned Parenthood of South Florida and the Treasure Coast Inc — 6% of income from government
- Feeding South Florida Inc — 5% of income from government
- Vizcaya Museum and Gardens Trust Inc — 3% of income from government
- Cradles to Crayons Inc — 2% of income from government
- Planned Parenthood of Northern New England Inc — 2% of income from government
- Southwestern Vermont Medical Center — 1% of income from government
- Indian River Land Trust Inc — 0% of income from government
- Planned Parenthood of Maryland Inc — 0% of income from government
- Chapman Partnership Inc — 0% of income from government
- The Learning Alliance Inc — 0% of income from government
- Global Empowerment Mission Inc — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Prentice Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to The Prentice 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.