Skip to content
The Tiffany & Co Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Tiffany & Co Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$5.0M
Granted FY2021
13
Grants FY2021
7
States reached
$1.2M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

50% of The Tiffany & Co Foundation’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 3 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2021, the last year The Tiffany & Co Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 9 organizations, $5M. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

14
’20
9
’21
11
’22
3
’24

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Philanthropy$5.8MEnvironment$5.5MAnimals$2.2MInternational$1.3MPublic Benefit$1.2MScience & Tech$600kRecreation & Sports$250kCivil Rights$250k
02FY2021 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2021

  • $50k–250k7 grants · $800k
  • $250k+6 grants · $4.2M
$150,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$6.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
XPRIZE FOUNDATION INC$1,200,000
ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC$1,000,000
CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION$1,000,000
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY$500,000
HAWAII COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$250,000
EARTHWORKS$250,000
NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY$150,000
PACT INC$150,000
CLARK FORK COALITION$125,000
OCEANA INC$125,000
WILD EARTH ALLIES INC$100,000
RESOLVE INC$100,000
ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC$50,000
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 (FY20–20, $250k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%NATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE INC: $250k → 17%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

MT
NY
MA
CA
VA
MD
SC
DC
HI
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 41% of The Tiffany & Co Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Tiffany & Co Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 21% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
$7.2M · 9 repeat orgs$4.3M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +42% since the first grant, against +20% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2021, 1 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call). Read against FY2021, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
7

Total granted

$7.2M
$1.9M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+42%
+20%

Still filing today

100%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’24
EnvironmentInternationalAnimalsPublic BenefitRecreation & SportsHuman ServicesOther
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

  • WC
    Wildlife Conservation Society
    4× · 2020–2024 · $2.2M · revenue +57%
  • CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION
    4× · 2020–2024 · $2.1M · revenue +94%
  • RI
    RESOLVE INC
    3× · 2020–2022 · $655k · revenue +61%

Funded once

  • UNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2020 · $750k · revenue -74%
  • DIRECT RELIEF
    one grant, 2020 · $250k · revenue +20%
  • CF
    COMMUNITY FUNDS INC
    one grant, 2020 · $250k
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

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
2
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
3
Ocean Conservancy

Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.

Environment
4
Rainforest Foundation Inc

The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.

Environment
5
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
6
Rainforest Alliance Inc

RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.

—
7
Friends of the Earth

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…

Environment
8
Project Drawdown

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;…

Education
9
Wildaid Inc

Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.

Animals
10
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
11
Rainforest Action Network

Rainforest Action Network (RAN) works toward a world where the rights and dignity of all communities are respected and where healthy forests, a stable climate and wild biodiversity are protected and celebrated.

Environment
12
The Coral Reef and Marine Science Foundation Inc C/O James Bildner
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Blacksmith Institute Inc; the most unlike its peers is Wildlife Conservation Society. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

20 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. 20 of the 23 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
14/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $4,550,000 · PhilanthropyROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS IN…HAWAII COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $950,000 · PhilanthropyHAWAII COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $2,100,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION INTERNATIONA…OCEANA INC: $575,000 · EnvironmentOCEANA INCCLARK FORK COALITION: $375,000 · EnvironmentCLARK FORK COALITIONWild Earth Allies Inc: $275,000 · EnvironmentWild Earth Allies IncGreat Barrier Reef Foundation USA Inc: $250,000 · EnvironmentGreat Barrier Reef Founda…THE CORAL REEF ALLIANCE: $235,000 · EnvironmentTHE CORAL REEF ALLIANCEWildlife Conservation Society: $2,165,000 · AnimalsWildlife Conservat…RESOLVE INC: $655,000 · AnimalsRESOLVE INCX PRIZE FOUNDATION INC: $1,200,000 · Public BenefitX PRIZE FOU…Earthworks: $550,000 · Public BenefitEarthworksUNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INC: $750,000 · InternationalUNITED NA…PACT INC: $325,000 · InternationalPACT INCDIRECT RELIEF: $250,000 · InternationalDIRECT RE…BLACKSMITH INSTITUTE INC: $100,000 · InternationalBLACKSMIT…COMMUNITY FUNDS INC: $250,000 · OtherEARTHWORKS: $250,000 · OtherFORCE BLUE INC: $93,000 · OtherCITY PARKS FOUNDATION INC: $250,000 · OtherNATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE INC: $250,000 · OtherWOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION: $100,000 · OtherNATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY: $500,000 · Education
Philanthropy$5,500,000Environment$3,810,000Animals$2,820,000Public Benefit$1,750,000International$1,425,000Other$1,193,000Education$500,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $4,550,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society: $2,165,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $2,100,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetX PRIZE FOUNDATION INC: $1,200,000 over 1y, 6.1% of budgetHAWAII COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $950,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetUNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INC: $750,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetRESOLVE INC: $655,000 over 3y, 5.3% of budgetOCEANA INC: $575,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetEarthworks: $550,000 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetNATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY: $500,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCLARK FORK COALITION: $375,000 over 3y, 6.6% of budgetPACT INC: $325,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWild Earth Allies Inc: $275,000 over 3y, 3.3% of budgetDIRECT RELIEF: $250,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCITY PARKS FOUNDATION INC: $250,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetGreat Barrier Reef Foundation USA Inc: $250,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetNATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE INC: $250,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CORAL REEF ALLIANCE: $235,000 over 2y, 3.6% of budgetWOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBLACKSMITH INSTITUTE INC: $100,000 over 1y, 1.0% 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Silicon Valley Commun…Gordon E and Betty I …American Endowment Fo…Vanguard Charitable E…Network for GoodNational Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA14× affinity5 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Tiffany & Co Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Tiffany & Co Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 63%
  • Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution: 63% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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 Tiffany & Co Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Tiffany & Co 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 23 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Tiffany &’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home