Skip to content
The Rardin Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

The Rardin 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.

$23k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$5k
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, FY2020 to 2025.

Human Services$23kEnvironment$21kHealth$19kFood & Nutrition$14kReligion$14kCrime & Legal$10kYouth Development$8kEducation$4kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$4,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$190k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHANGENT$5,000
360ORG$4,000
SECOND HARVEST FOODBANK OF S WI$4,000
DEMOCRACY FORWARD FOUNDATION$4,000
BRAVER ANGELS$3,000
NATIONAL PREVENTION SCIENCE COALTIO$2,500
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 (FY20–25, $19k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 78% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%BRAVER ANGELS: $5k → 17%BRAVER ANGELS: $4k → 17%LASSIER COMM ED CENTER: $4k → 10%BRAVER ANGELS: $3k → 17%BRAVER ANGELS: $3k → 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
WI
NY
MA
PA
CA
CO
DC
AL
GA
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.

55%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$67k · 7 repeat orgs$56k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +32% since the first grant, against +27% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
10

Total granted

$67k
$40k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+32%
+27%

Still filing today

86%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 31% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $16k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesCivil RightsFood & NutritionAnimalsInternationalEnvironmentOther
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

  • BA
    Braver AngelsInc
    4× · 2021–2025 · $15k · revenue +149%
  • GH
    GOLDEN HARVEST FOOD BANK INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $10k · revenue +32%
  • LO
    LAKE OCONEE HUMANE SOCIETY INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $4k · revenue +61%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $8k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $6k
  • GC
    GREENE COUNTY CHRISTIAN OUTREACH INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $6k · revenue +45%
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
Dc Greens Inc

DC Greens advances health equity by building a just and resilient food system.

Community Improvement
2
Grist Magazine Inc

Grist is an independent, non profit media organization dedicated to reporting on climate change.

Environment
3
Equitable Food Initiative

EFIs mission is to transform the produce industry and the lives of farmworkers by facilitating collaboration among workers, agricultural employers, retail buyers and consumer advocates.

Human Services
4
Switch4Good

Advancing Health Equity Through Food System Change We are a nonprofit advancing food equity and nutrition security by working at the intersection of public health, education and policy. We start with dairy because of its outsized impact on…

Animals
5
New Roots Institute

New Roots Institute is a nonprofit empowering the next generation with knowledge and training to end factory farming.

Food & Nutrition
6
Global Greengrants Fund

Global greengrants fund seeds grassroots environmental action and social justice through small grants. we support change from the ground up by channeling donations to local projects and grassroots campaigns for environmental justice around…

Environment
7
Groundswell International Inc

Groundswell International strenghtens communities to build healthy farming and food systems from the ground up.

International
8
CoreGiving Co

Engage in the charitable purpose of combating childhood hunger.

Philanthropy
9
Sustainable Harvest International

Working together to create a just and sustainable world through transformative farmer training that nourishes communities and the Earth.

Environment
10
Greenlight Action

Greenlight action mobilizes grassroots power to get more clean energy projects built more quickly across the united states.

Environment
11
Southern Coalition for Social Justice

Southern coalition for social justice partners with communities of color and economically disadvantaged communities across the south to defend and advance their political, social, and economic rights. through an intersectional and…

Crime & Legal
12
Fund for Justice

Fund for Justice is a nationally connected social impact research and advocacy organization that works to achieve fundamental, systemic reform by addressing policies and practicies that prevent individuals from reaching their full…

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Democracy Forward Foundation; the most unlike its peers is 365 Media Foundation 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

14 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. 14 of the 22 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)
14/14
Grantees still filing
6/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GREENE CO GA CHRISTIAN OUTREACH: $11,000 · OtherGREENE CO GA CHRISTIAN OUTREACHIndividual grant recipient: $7,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientSUNRISE MOVEMENT: $7,500 · OtherSUNRISE MOVEMENTIndividual grant recipient: $6,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCHANGENT: $5,000 · OtherCHANGENTMOVEMENT FOR BLACK LIVES: $5,000 · OtherMOVEMENT FOR BLACK LIVESTHIRD SECT NEW ENGLAND (PACES CONN): $3,000 · OtherBread and Roses Community Fund: $3,000 · OtherYES: $2,500 · OtherCTIPP: $2,500 · OtherDEMOCRACY FORWARD FOUNDATION: $4,000 · OtherDEMOCRACY FORWARD FOUNDATIONNATIONAL PREVENTION SCIENCE COALITION TO IMPROVE LIVES INC: $2,500 · Other+1 more: $2,000 · OtherBraver AngelsInc: $14,500 · Human ServicesBraver AngelsIncLUSSIER COMMUNITY EDUCATION CENTER INC: $4,000 · Human ServicesLUSSIER COMMUNIT…GOLDEN HARVEST FOOD BANK INC: $10,000 · Food & NutritionGOLDEN HARVE…SECOND HARVEST FOODBANK OF SOUTHERN WI: $4,000 · Food & NutritionSECOND HARVE…EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $9,500 · Civil RightsEQUAL JUST…365 Media Foundation Inc: $2,000 · Civil Rights365 Media …350ORG: $10,500 · Environment350ORGGREENE COUNTY CHRISTIAN OUTREACH INC: $5,500 · ReligionLAKE OCONEE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $4,000 · Animals
Other$61,500Human Services$18,500Food & Nutrition$14,000Civil Rights$11,500Environment$10,500Religion$5,500Animals$4,000

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 budgetBraver AngelsInc: $14,500 over 4y, 0.2% of budget350ORG: $10,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetGOLDEN HARVEST FOOD BANK INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $9,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSUNRISE MOVEMENT: $7,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetGREENE COUNTY CHRISTIAN OUTREACH INC: $5,500 over 1y, 5.1% of budgetSECOND HARVEST FOODBANK OF SOUTHERN WI: $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLAKE OCONEE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $4,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetDEMOCRACY FORWARD FOUNDATION: $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLUSSIER COMMUNITY EDUCATION CENTER INC: $4,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBread and Roses Community Fund: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget365 Media Foundation Inc: $2,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetFONKOZE USA INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Rardin Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Rardin Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 22 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 Rardin’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