Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Realization 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.

$1.8M
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$600k
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, FY2019 to 2024.

Human Services$5.4MPhilanthropy$2.8MPublic Safety & Disaster$500kInternational$350kCivil Rights$60kCrime & Legal$10k
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $300k
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.5M
$150,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$26M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FIDELITY CHARITABLE$600,000
PEACE IN SCHOOLS$550,000
GS DONOR ADVISED PHILANTHROPY FUND FOR WEALTH MANAGEMENT INC$310,000
ATLAS PROJECT$150,000
MARICI$100,000
LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF THE SOUTH INCCHILD & FAMILY SERVICES DBA UPBR$50,000
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR LAW & JUSTICE INC$10,000
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 (FY19–24, $3.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 11% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%MARICI: $900k → 10%THE COUNTER TRAFFICKING GROUP: $200k → 12%MARICI: $900k → 10%THE COUNTER TRAFFICKING GROUP: $150k → 12%MARICI: $600k → 10%MARICI: $200k → 10%MARICI: $100k → 10%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

IL
NY
OR
CA
CO
DC
TX
FL
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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$8.1M · 5 repeat orgs$710k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +78% since the first grant, against -51% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
1

Total granted

$8.1M
$500k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+78%
-51%

Still filing today

80%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $210k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesPublic Safety & DisasterPhilanthropyOther
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

  • M
    MARICI
    5× · 2019–2024 · $2.7M · revenue ×21 · 65% of their budget
  • PEACE IN SCHOOLS
    6× · 2019–2024 · $2.7M · revenue +78% · 79% of their budget
  • FC
    FIDELITY CHARITABLE
    5× · 2020–2024 · $2.3M

Funded once

  • TF
    The Foundation United
    one grant, 2019 · $500k · revenue -51% · 39% of their budget
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

7 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. 7 of the 10 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
3/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MARICI: $2,700,000 · Human ServicesMARICIPEACE IN SCHOOLS: $2,661,618 · Human ServicesPEACE IN SCHOOLSTHE COUNTER TRAFFICKING GROUP: $350,000 · Human ServicesTHE COUNTER TRAFFICKING GROUPFIDELITY CHARITABLE: $2,305,000 · OtherFIDELITY CHARITABLE+3 more: $120,000 · OtherThe Foundation United: $500,000 · Public Safety & DisasterGS DONOR ADVISED PHILANTHROPY FUND FOR WEALTH MANAGEMENT INC: $310,000 · PhilanthropyATLAS PROJECT: $150,000 · Philanthropy
Human Services$5,711,618Other$2,425,000Public Safety & Disaster$500,000Philanthropy$460,000

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 budgetMARICI: $2,700,000 over 5y, 65% of budgetPEACE IN SCHOOLS: $2,661,618 over 6y, 79% of budgetThe Foundation United: $500,000 over 1y, 39% of budgetTHE COUNTER TRAFFICKING GROUP: $350,000 over 2y, 100% of budgetGS DONOR ADVISED PHILANTHROPY FUND FOR WEALTH MANAGEMENT INC: $310,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetATLAS PROJECT: $150,000 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetADVOCATES FOR YOUTH: $60,000 over 2y, 0.4% 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 MARICI ↗
  • Who funds PEACE IN SCHOOLS ↗
  • Who funds The Foundation United ↗
  • Who funds THE COUNTER TRAFFICKING GROUP ↗
  • Who funds GS DONOR ADVISED PHILANTHROPY FUND FOR WEALTH MANAGEMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds ATLAS PROJECT ↗
  • Who funds ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH ↗

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.

National Philanthropic TrustPA8.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · 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 Realization Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Realization Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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 Realization Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Realization Foundation 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 10 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 Realization’s filings →

    More from the funding graph