· Private foundation
The Shifting Foundation
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 FY2021–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k17 grants · $483k
- $50k–250k24 grants · $1.3M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) | $65,000 |
| Union of Concerned Scientists | $65,000 |
| Environmental Defense Fund | $65,000 |
| Earthjustice | $65,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $55,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $55,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $55,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $55,000 |
| Dead Letter Office (Frank Heath) | $55,000 |
| Vimalakirti LLC (Ganavya Doraiswamy) | $55,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $55,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $53,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $53,000 |
| Southcoast Community Foundation | $50,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $50,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY21–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 78% of your 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 37% of The Shifting Foundation’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 +21% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.
35 repeat relationships — 25 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down; 15 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, 62% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $658k 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
EARTHJUSTICE4× · 2021–2024 · $275k · revenue +49%
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED4× · 2021–2024 · $275k · revenue +21%
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC4× · 2021–2024 · $185k · revenue +26%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2021 · $863k
- AAECTone grant, 2023 · $82k
- ATAmboseli Trust for Elephantsone grant, 2022 · $75k
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.
Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
The climate institute is organized for the purpose of educating the general public and policy makers as to the gravity of potential climate change, exploring the policy implications of the latest scientific findings on climate modelling…
To research and develop centrist policy ideas.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…
Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.
To raise awareness about the potential to reduce environmental harm by shifting electricity use to particular times; to encourage the development and spread of common protocols for this practice.
Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.
Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated and the most unlike its peers is African Elephant Conservation Trust. 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 39 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 10% 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.
27 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. 27 of the 98 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
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 EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds PYROCLASTIC ARTS INC ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds 350ORG ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds THE NASHER SCULPTURE CENTER ↗
- Who funds AFRICAN ELEPHANT CONSERVATION TRUST ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds PRO PUBLICA INC ↗
- Who funds RAW ART WORKS INC ↗
- Who funds Massachusetts Institute of Technology ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF MOUNT HOLYOKE COLLEGE ↗
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: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Charities Aid Foundation America · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 Shifting Foundation 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.
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology — 35% of income from government
- Southcoast Community Foundation Inc — 10% of income from government
- Raw Art Works Inc — 7% of income from government
- The Trustees of Mount Holyoke College — 1% 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.