Skip to content

· Public charity

The Real Estate Roundtable Inc

The real estate roundtable brings together leaders of the nation's top publicly-held and privately-owned real estate ownership, development, lending, and management firms with leaders of major national real estate trade associations to address key national policy issues impacting real estate and the economy.

$25k
Granted FY2022
1
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2022.

Public Benefit$300kArts & Culture$100k
02FY2022 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$6.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NO LABELS$25,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY18–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 74% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%KENNEDY CENTER: $100k → 14%ONE NATION: $50k → 6%NEW HAMPSHIRE DEMOCRATIC PARTY: $5k → 7%MAJORITY FORWARD: $50k → 14%ONE NATION: $50k → 6%MAJORITY FORWARD: $50k → 14%DEMOCRATIC GOVERNORS ASSOCIATION: $25k → 14%FUTURE FORUM FOUNDATION: $20k → 14%NO LABELS: $25k → 14%NO LABELS: $25k → 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.
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.

63%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$250k · 3 repeat orgs$150k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +117% since the first grant, against +62% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2022, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
4

Total granted

$250k
$150k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+117%
+62%

Still filing today

67%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22
Public BenefitArts & CultureOther
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

  • ON
    ONE NATION
    2× · 2018–2020 · $100k · revenue +117%
  • MF
    MAJORITY FORWARD
    2× · 2018–2019 · $100k · revenue +176%
  • NL
    No Labels
    2× · 2021–2022 · $50k · revenue -34%

Funded once

  • JF
    JOHN F KENNEDY CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTSgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $100k · revenue +62%
  • DG
    DEMOCRATIC GOVERNORS ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2018 · $25k
  • FF
    FUTURE FORUM FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2019 · $20k · revenue +8%
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
04the grantee network

5 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 5 of the 7 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
4/5
Grantees still filing
4/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MAJORITY FORWARD: $100,000 · OtherMAJORITY FORWARDNo Labels: $50,000 · OtherNo LabelsDEMOCRATIC GOVERNORS ASSOCIATION: $25,000 · OtherDEMOCRATIC GOVERNORS ASSOCIATION+1 more: $5,000 · OtherONE NATION: $100,000 · Public BenefitONE NATIONFUTURE FORUM FOUNDATION: $20,000 · Public BenefitFUTURE FORUM FOUNDATIONJOHN F KENNEDY CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS: $100,000 · Arts & CultureJOHN F KENNEDY CENTER FOR TH…
Other$180,000Public Benefit$120,000Arts & Culture$100,000

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 budgetJOHN F KENNEDY CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetONE NATION: $100,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMAJORITY FORWARD: $100,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetNo Labels: $50,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetFUTURE FORUM FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 1y, 6.0% 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.

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Biotechnology Innovation OrganizationDC13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Biotechnology Innovation Organization

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 Real Estate Roundtable Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Real Estate Roundtable Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 7 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $3k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2022, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Real Estate Roundtable’s filings →

    More from the funding graph