Skip to content
Tioga Fund Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Tioga Fund Inc

Development and implementation of advocacy strategies to advance climate changesolutions, address women's inequality, improve democratic institutions, and protect civil liberties.

$1.7M
Granted FY2022
4
Grants FY2022
4
States reached
$1.2M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2022.

Civil Rights$1.3MEnvironment$1.1MPublic Benefit$1.0MCommunity Improvement$175kHuman Services$30k
02FY2022 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2022

  • $50k–250k2 grants · $200k
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.5M
$292,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$211k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FAMILY FRIENDLY ACTION FUND$1,200,000
SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND$292,000
TIDES ADVOCACY$100,000
WESTERN FUTURES FUND$100,000
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 (FY20–21, $155k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Living Untd for Change in AZ: $30k → 11%Citizen Action of New York: $125k → 14%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

ME
NH
WA
MN
NY
MA
WY
OH
CA
MD
AZ
NC
DC
GA
TX
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

13%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$410k · 4 repeat orgs$2.7M to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2022, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
21

Total granted

$410k
$1.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-40%
+12%

Still filing today

100%
90%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 7% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.3M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22
EnvironmentCivil RightsCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther
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

  • TA
    TIDES ADVOCACY
    2× · 2020–2022 · $155k · revenue -40%
  • OC
    Oil Change USA
    3× · 2017–2019 · $120k · revenue -89% · 63% of their budget
  • CC
    CHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK ACTION FUND INC
    2× · 2017–2021 · $70k · revenue ×18

Funded once

  • NP
    NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc
    one grant, 2018 · $175k · revenue -34%
  • LO
    LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $150k · revenue +104%
  • IF
    INSTITUTE FOR GOVERNANCE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENTgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $125k · revenue +77%
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
Coalition for Green Capital D/B/a American Green Bank Consortium

Cgc operates as a nonprofit financial institution that invests directly and through partners to transform financial markets by using public and private investing to accelerate the deployment of projects that strengthen the grid, reduce…

Environment
2
Friends of the Earth (Action) Inc

To improve the environment through education and policy work, with an emphasis on pollution, climate change, and energy issues; and how congress and the administration stand on these issues.

—
3
Climate Power

Climate power is working to ensure political, social, and economic progress on climate by winning the politics of climate.

Environment
4
Climate Equity Action Fund

The climate equity action fund (ceaf) works hand-in-hand with community-based partners in critical states across the country to secure and sustain policy wins for climate and clean energy. building on over a decade of trust with leading…

Environment
5
Greenlight Action

Greenlight action mobilizes grassroots power to get more clean energy projects built more quickly across the united states.

Environment
6
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
7
Climate Foundation

To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.

Science & Tech
8
Climate Defiance Action

Advocate for climate change and other environmental action via nonviolent direct action

—
9
E3G Third Generation Environmentalism

E3g is a leading international not-for-profit think tank specialising in climate diplomacy harnessing expertise in the politics and economics of climate change.

Environment
10
Climate Leadership Council Inc

To develop and promote a carbon dividends framework - based on carbon fees whose revenues are rebated to citizens through dividends - as the most cost-effective, equitable, and politically viable climate solution.

Environment
11
Climate Innovation Action Inc

To educate policymakers about climate policies generally and to directly advocate for specific legislation on climate change.

Environment
12
Climate Breakthrough Inc

To launch breakthrough climate mitigation efforts by identifying, supporting, and unleashing innovative leaders with transformative strategies.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Center for Community Change Action; the most unlike its peers is Conservation Law Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

27 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. 27 of the 28 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
26/27
Grantees still filing
18/27
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FORWARD ACTION FUND: $1,200,000 · Civil RightsFORWARD ACTION FUNDNEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc: $175,000 · Civil RightsNEO Philanthropy Action Fund IncLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $150,000 · Civil RightsLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INCEND CITIZENS UNITED LET AMERICA VOTE ACTION FUND: $100,000 · Civil RightsEND CITIZENS UNITED LET AMERICA VOTE ACTION FUNDCHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK ACTION FUND INC: $70,000 · Civil RightsSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $472,000 · EnvironmentSIXTEEN THIRTY FUNDCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC: $125,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATIO…Oil Change USA: $120,000 · EnvironmentOil Change USA350ORG ACTION FUND: $65,000 · Environment350ORG ACTION FUND+3 more: $65,000 · Environment+3 moreTIDES ADVOCACY: $155,000 · OtherTIDES ADVOCA…NEW GEORGIA PROJECT ACTION FUND: $110,000 · OtherNEW GEORGIA …FAITH IN ACTION FUND: $65,000 · OtherFAITH IN ACT…SUNRISE MOVEMENT: $25,000 · OtherSUNRISE MOVE…Stand Up for Ohio: $15,000 · Other+2 more: $20,000 · OtherMAINE PEOPLE'S ALLIANCE: $100,000 · Community ImprovementPEOPLE'S ACTION: $75,000 · Community ImprovementADVANCE NORTH CAROLINA INC: $15,000 · Community ImprovementCITIZEN ACTION OF NEW YORK INC: $125,000 · Human ServicesLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $30,000 · Human ServicesINSTITUTE FOR GOVERNANCE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: $125,000 · InternationalREPOWER: $75,000 · Public BenefitCENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE ACTION: $35,000 · Public BenefitWESTERN FUTURES FUND INC: $100,000 · Philanthropy
Civil Rights$1,695,000Environment$847,000Other$390,000Community Improvement$190,000Human Services$155,000International$125,000Public Benefit$110,000Philanthropy$100,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFORWARD ACTION FUND: $1,200,000 over 1y, 7.1% of budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $472,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetNEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc: $175,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY: $155,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $150,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR GOVERNANCE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: $125,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC: $125,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetCITIZEN ACTION OF NEW YORK INC: $125,000 over 1y, 8.0% of budgetOil Change USA: $120,000 over 3y, 63% of budgetNEW GEORGIA PROJECT ACTION FUND: $110,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetEND CITIZENS UNITED LET AMERICA VOTE ACTION FUND: $100,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetWESTERN FUTURES FUND INC: $100,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetMAINE PEOPLE'S ALLIANCE: $100,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetPEOPLE'S ACTION: $75,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetREPOWER: $75,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetCHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK ACTION FUND INC: $70,000 over 2y, 18% of budgetFAITH IN ACTION FUND: $65,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budget350ORG ACTION FUND: $65,000 over 2y, 26% of budgetCENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE ACTION: $35,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $30,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetFOOD & WATER ACTION FUND: $25,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetPartnership for Policy Integrity: $20,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetCLIMATE HAWKS VOTE CIVIC ACTION: $20,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetADVANCE NORTH CAROLINA INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetBlack Voters Matter Fund Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTEXAS ORGANIZING PROJECT: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% 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.

Sixteen Thirty FundTides AdvocacyOpen Society Action F…Women Donors Network …Way to Win Action Fun…All Hands on Deck Net…The Heising-Simons Ac…Instructional Telecom…Tides FoundationAmerica VotesNorth FundSee Forward Fund Inc
Sixteen Thirty FundDC37.4× affinity16 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · Tides Advocacy · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Women Donors Network Action · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · The Heising-Simons Action Fund · Instructional Telecommunications Foundation Inc · Tides Foundation · America Votes · North Fund · See Forward Fund Inc

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 Tioga Fund Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Tioga Fund Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 30%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 Tioga Fund Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Tioga Fund 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.

    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 28 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $70k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2022, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Tioga’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