· Private foundation
The Yip Harburg Foundation Inc
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k20 grants · $73k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THURSTON SANTO TOMAS SISTER COUNTY ASSN | $20,000 |
| JUSTICE BY OBJECTIVES | $6,000 |
| THE SISTERHOOD IS GLOBAL INSTITUTE INC | $5,000 |
| FREE TO RUN INC | $5,000 |
| THE CLINIC | $5,000 |
| BLACK ARTS MKE INC | $5,000 |
| FREER RECORDS INC | $5,000 |
| CIVIL JUSTICE INC | $5,000 |
| CONGREGATION OF THE SISTERS OF SAINT JOSEPH | $5,000 |
| OO PROJECT | $5,000 |
| OPENING WORD PROGRAM INC | $5,000 |
| CATCHING THE DREAM | $3,000 |
| MIDWESTERN INNOCENCE PROJECT INC | $2,500 |
| GENERATING INCOME FOR TOMORROW | $2,500 |
| OAKLAND PEACE CENTER | $2,500 |
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 (FY24–25, $22k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 55% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
24 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down; 9 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, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $33k 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
- RRun-Hope-Work3× · 2021–2024 · $15k · revenue +45%
- DMDIOCESAN MIGRANT & REFUGEE SERVICES INC2× · 2022–2023 · $15k · revenue +25%
- BABLACK ARTS MKE INC3× · 2022–2025 · $11k · revenue +3%
Funded once
- RARainforest Action Networkone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -29%
- BEBREAKFREE EDUCATIONone grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue -58%
- KDKEEP DREAMS ALIVE FOUNDATIONone grant, 2024 · $5k
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 Guernica Centre for International Justice represents the interests of victims in national and international legal proceedings, putting in place transnational accountability strategies that seek to maximize the protection of victims'…
Detention Watch Network seeks to end the cruel system of immigration detention via programs of grassroots organizing, strategic communications, and collective advocacy.
To produce bold theatre experiences that reach across artistic, physical and social boundries. We aim to increase empathy and open-mindedness by illuminating nuanced perspectives and unspoken truths behind the salient issues of our time.…
To lead and coordinate the global initiative to address and prevent criminalization, violence, and impunity against indigenous peoples towards strengthening their collectives, solidarity, and actions.
Advocate for gender equality in the film industry.
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.
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…
At Shift, we have one purpose: to transform how business gets done in order to ensure respect for peoples lives and dignity. We believe that the best way to advance our mission is by working directly with Businesses to help shape their…
The Oakland Institute, an independent policy think tank, works to support global struggles for Indigenous rights, human rights, and land rights and to promote public participation and fair debate on critical social, economic, and…
The Equal Justice Society (EJS) is transforming the nations consciousness on racethrough law, social science, and the arts. EJS works to dismantle structural andinstitutional racism to advance robust equal protection under the Fourteenth…
The center for international policy is a woman-led, progressive, independent nonprofit center for research, education, and advocacy working to advance a more peaceful, just, and sustainable u.s. approach to foreign policy. through…
Iaf's purpose is to conduct research and publicize findings concerning citizen's attitudes about economic options confronting america. iaf is devoted to fostering a robust and democratic debate about ideas that will shape our country's…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Black Ensemble Theater Corporation and the most unlike its peers is 350EUG. 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 14 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 5% 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.
60 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. 60 of the 69 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 Wisconsin Network for Peace and Justice Inc ↗
- Who funds Run-Hope-Work ↗
- Who funds THE BAIL PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds DIOCESAN MIGRANT & REFUGEE SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds DAVIS-PUTTER SCHOLARSHIP FUND ↗
- Who funds BLACK ARTS MKE INC ↗
- Who funds OO PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Dignity Period ↗
- Who funds CAMPAIGN FOR UYGHURS INC ↗
- Who funds FREER RECORDS INC ↗
- Who funds CIVIL JUSTICE INC ↗
- Who funds SISTERHOOD IS GLOBAL INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds Rainforest Action Network ↗
- Who funds THE VILLAGE A COMMUNITY MUSICAL ART ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN MAKE MOVIES INC ↗
- Who funds MIDWEST INNOCENCE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds The Coalition of Immokalee Workers Inc ↗
- Who funds BREAKFREE EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds National Domestic Workers Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds Catching the Dream ↗
- Who funds MEDICAL DEBT RESOLUTION INC ↗
- Who funds FREE TO RUN INC ↗
- Who funds SHELTERCARE ↗
- Who funds POWER SHIFT NETWORK ↗
- Who funds Innovations Human Trafficking Collaborative ↗
- Who funds PEN & SWORD ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT DOCUMENTARY INC ↗
- Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds OPENING WORD PROGRAM INC ↗
- Who funds Opus 1 Foundation Corp ↗
- Who funds End1in4 Inc ↗
- Who funds THEATER FOR THE NEW CITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds AD HOC GROUP AGAINST CRIME ↗
- Who funds GENERATING INCOME FOR TOMORROW ↗
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 Ford Foundation · The Hyde and Watson Foundation · Public Welfare Foundation Inc · Open Society Institute · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · The New York Community Trust · California Community Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Impactassetsinc · The Chicago Community Trust · Jewish Communal 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 Yip Harburg 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.
- Rock Creek Conservancy Inc — 60% of income from government
- Civil Justice Inc — 23% of income from government
- Sheltercare — 18% of income from government
- The Center for Independent Documentary Inc — 6% 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 Yip Harburg Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to The Yip Harburg 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.