· Private foundation
The Susie Tompkins Buell 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $720
- $10k–50k15 grants · $245k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $150k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| RED WINE & BLUE EDUCATION FUND | $50,000 |
| GLOBAL PRESS INSTITUTE | $50,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA | $50,000 |
| VOTO LATINO FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| VOTE MAMA FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| REMAKE | $25,000 |
| VOTEAMERICA INC | $25,000 |
| BLACK LEADERS ORGANIZING COMMUNITIES (BLOC) | $15,000 |
| WE ARE DOWN HOME | $15,000 |
| SPARK REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE NOW | $15,000 |
| MAKE THE ROAD STATES-PA | $15,000 |
| PODER IN ACTION | $15,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $15,000 |
| MOTHERING JUSTICE | $15,000 |
| ASIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL | $10,000 |
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 (FY18–24, $245k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 20% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
27 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 9 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, 63% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $145k 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
- RWRED WINE & BLUE EDUCATION FUND3× · 2022–2024 · $150k · revenue +120%
THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC3× · 2020–2023 · $55k · revenue +69%- WAWORKING AMERICA EDUCATION FUND2× · 2020–2022 · $40k · revenue +324%
Funded once
- CECLIMATE EMERGENCY FUNDgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $150k · revenue +137%
- APAGHAAZ PROJECT AT VITAL VOICES GLOBAL PARTNERSHIPone grant, 2023 · $100k
WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF CALIFORNIAone grant, 2019 · $75k · revenue -42%
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.
Women donors network advances a just, equitable, and sustainable world through the power of philanthropy, women's leadership, and collective and individual action.
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,…
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 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.
Ultraviolet action (uva) is a 501c4 organization. ultraviolet action is the premier national organization advocating for gender justice issues using creative, strategic campaigning and digital-first organizing. ultraviolet drives feminist…
Our mission as a global alliance is to provide strategies, research, and resources that support the critical agency and influence of women's foundations and gender justice funders in the movement for equality, justice, and power for all.
Forward Together is a national reproductive justice organization that centers people, families, and communities who experience reproductive oppression. They prioritize queer, trans, Black, Indigenous, and other peoples of color and utilize…
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…
Educational & charitable. to provide legal and scientific information to public interest attorneys and scientists in numerous countries.
The organization's mission is to leverage web-technologies to improve civic engagement and voter education.
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.
Pro publica is an independent, non-profit, pulitzer prize-winning newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest. our work focuses exclusively on truly important stories. [see continuation on schedule o] we produce…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Women's Foundation of California and the most unlike its peers is Houston in Action. 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 23 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) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 2% 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.
85 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. 85 of the 105 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 Remake ↗
- Who funds RED WINE & BLUE EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE EMERGENCY FUND ↗
- Who funds Global Press Institute ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds The Representation Project ↗
- Who funds UltraViolet Education Fund ↗
- Who funds VOTO LATINO INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds WILDEARTH GUARDIANS ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
- Who funds WORKING AMERICA EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds VOTEORG ↗
- Who funds FUTURES WITHOUT VIOLENCE ↗
- Who funds SPARK REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE NOW ↗
- Who funds MOTHERING JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Make The Road States Inc ↗
- Who funds Poder in Action ↗
- Who funds VITAL VOICES GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC RIGHTS PROJECT ↗
- Who funds VOTO LATINO FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ZERO FOODPRINT ↗
- Who funds REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WE ARE DOWN HOME ↗
- Who funds PANORAMA GLOBAL ↗
- Who funds Ten Strands ↗
- Who funds VOTEAMERICA ↗
- Who funds VOTE MAMA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds REDFORD CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds TIDES CENTER ↗
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: Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · New Venture Fund · NEO Philanthropy Inc · Tides Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Tides Center · Way to Rise · Windward Fund · Hopewell Fund
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 Susie Tompkins Buell 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Third Sector New England Inc — 3% 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 Susie Tompkins Buell Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Susie Tompkins Buell 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.