· Private foundation
The Reis 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k10 grants · $50k
- $10k–50k15 grants · $255k
- $50k–250k26 grants · $3.1M
- $250k+2 grants · $530k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Proteus Fund | $280,000 |
| Groundswell Fund | $250,000 |
| Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights | $200,000 |
| League of Women Voters Education Fund | $200,000 |
| EarthJustice | $200,000 |
| NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund | $200,000 |
| Advancement Project | $200,000 |
| National Immigration Law Center | $200,000 |
| Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors | $200,000 |
| Native American Rights Fund | $200,000 |
| Common Cause Education Foundation | $200,000 |
| Chautauqua Foundation | $145,000 |
| Humboldt Area Foundation | $135,000 |
| If When How | $100,000 |
| Center for Biological Diversity | $100,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $134k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 93% 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.
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 +40% since the first grant, against +28% for the ones you funded once.
84 repeat relationships — 32 still active in FY2025, 52 since wound down; 16 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $690k 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
- GFGroundswell Fund6× · 2017–2025 · $1.3M · revenue +65%
EARTHJUSTICE6× · 2017–2025 · $800k · revenue +82%
NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER5× · 2017–2025 · $600k · revenue +79%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $100k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $100k
- AFAdvancement Fundone grant, 2021 · $100k
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.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Ca fwd drives action to identify solutions that can be taken to scale to meet the challenges the state is facing. the organization is driven by the belief that regional solutions across the state will help ensure economic, environmental,…
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.
Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with Indigenous communities in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability, and the preservation of the Amazon Basin's…
Common future is a network of pioneering leaders across the u.s. and canada who work deeply within their communities to create alternative approaches to business, philanthropy, and investing. we envision an economy that has transitioned…
The american civil liberties union of northern california (aclu nc union) defends and advances the principles of freedom, equality and justice contained in the united states constitution. aclu nc union, a california mutual benefit…
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Women's Foundation of California and the most unlike its peers is Internet Archive. 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 28 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) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
152 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. 152 of the 208 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 Groundswell Fund ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds BOREALIS PHILANTHROPY ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds PROTEUS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds HUMBOLDT AREA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law ↗
- Who funds Health Connected ↗
- Who funds NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC ↗
- Who funds MID KLAMATH WATERSHED COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds SOUTH COAST BOTANIC GARDEN FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PROFOUND GENTLEMEN INC ↗
- Who funds Women's Earth and Climate Action Network ↗
- Who funds Silicon Valley Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds United States Artists Inc ↗
- Who funds 350ORG ↗
- Who funds CHAUTAUQUA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds MASS DESIGN GROUP LTD ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds IFWHENHOW ↗
- Who funds LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds THE COMMUNITY ECOLOGY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Cornell University ↗
- Who funds IDEOORG ↗
- Who funds Alliance for California Traditional Arts ↗
- Who funds CHANGE LABS ↗
- Who funds PRO PUBLICA INC ↗
- Who funds FIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds OWEESTA CORPORATION ↗
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 San Francisco Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The California Wellness Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · The California Endowment · Humboldt Area Foundation · The James Irvine Foundation · Tides Foundation · Impactassetsinc
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 Reis 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Howard County Arts Council — 9% of income from government
- Oregon Shakespeare Festival Association Inc — 0% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% of income from government
- Oxfam-America 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 Reis Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to The Reis 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.