· Private foundation
Thrive Global Holdings 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 FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k19 grants · $39k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $29k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BRIGHTER BITES | $18,770 |
| NYU LANGONE HOSPITALS | $10,241 |
| NASHVILLE STREET PROJECT | $8,492 |
| SUMMIT HEALTH CARES | $4,154 |
| GOD'S LOVE WE DELIVER | $3,436 |
| HOLLYWOOD FOOD COALITION | $2,961 |
| HOMEBOY INDUSTRIES INC | $2,742 |
| ACTIVE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY | $2,632 |
| FOOD ACCESS LA | $2,632 |
| CULTIVALA INC | $2,523 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,720 |
| PROJECT NEW VILLAGE | $1,426 |
| OLIVEWOOD GARDENS & LEARNING CENTER INC | $1,426 |
| COASTAL ROOTS FARM | $1,426 |
| MAMA'S KITCHEN INC | $1,426 |
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 (FY20–25, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% 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 +7% since the first grant, against +2% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 17 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, 7% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $63k 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
- TYTHE YOUNG PEOPLE'S CHORUS OF NEW YORK CITY INC2× · 2023–2024 · $28k · revenue +31%
- CHCOVENANT HOUSE2× · 2023–2025 · $593 · revenue +7%
NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY2× · 2023–2025 · $400 · revenue +8%
Funded once
- TJTHE JED FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +22%
CHARITY GLOBAL INCone grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue +2%
EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVEone grant, 2020 · $1k · revenue -63%
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.
Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.
Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.
Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes. nyu's primary missions are education, research and scholarship, and patient care.
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;…
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
The mission of the global alliance for improved nutrition (gain) is to improve the consumption of healthier diets for all, especially the most vulnerable, by improving the availability, affordability, desirability, and sustainability of…
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…
To accelerate the development of breakthrough discoveries that will transform the lives of people living with food allergies.
Sanford burnham prebys medical discovery institute's mission is to advance the biomedical sciences by cultivating the next generation of scientific leaders, providing meaningful opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to learn,…
Public health institute generates and promotes research, leadership and partnerships to build capacity for strong public health policy, programs, systems and practices.
Improve the health of every person in our community through the efficient delivery of excellent, innovative and compassionate care.
Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is God's Love We Deliver Inc and the most unlike its peers is Cultivala Inc. 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 26 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% 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 12% 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.
38 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. 38 of the 47 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 TISBEST PHILANTHROPY ↗
- Who funds THE YOUNG PEOPLE'S CHORUS OF NEW YORK CITY INC ↗
- Who funds Brighter Bites Inc ↗
- Who funds NYU LANGONE HOSPITALS ↗
- Who funds THE JED FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CAUZE CHARITABLE FUND ↗
- Who funds BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF NEW YORK CITY INC ↗
- Who funds The Summit Medical Group Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds GOD'S LOVE WE DELIVER INC ↗
- Who funds HOLLYWOOD FOOD COALITION ↗
- Who funds HOMEBOY INDUSTRIES ↗
- Who funds SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC ENTERPRISES OF LA DBA FOOD ACCESS LOS ANGELES ↗
- Who funds Active San Gabriel Valley ↗
- Who funds CULTIVALA INC ↗
- Who funds CHARITY GLOBAL INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT NEW VILLAGE ↗
- Who funds MAMA'S KITCHEN ↗
- Who funds OLIVEWOODS GARDENS & LEARNING CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds COASTAL ROOTS FARM ↗
- Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds GenYOUTH Incorporated ↗
- Who funds BLACK EMOTIONAL AND MENTAL HEALTH COLLEC ↗
- Who funds BORN THIS WAY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ONE TREE PLANTED INC ↗
- Who funds CITY PARKS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds COVENANT HOUSE ↗
- Who funds AMERICARES FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL BRAIN TUMOR SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds Neponset River Watershed Association ↗
- Who funds Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗
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: Sempra Foundation · The San Diego Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · California Community Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good
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 Thrive Global Holdings 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.
- Neponset River Watershed Association — 8% of income from government
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- Americares Foundation 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 Thrive Global Holdings Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Thrive Global Holdings 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.