· Public charity
V-Day
To end violence against all women, gender-expansive people, girls, and the Earth.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 8 grants below total $120,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $586,118 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $466,118 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Ashe Cultural Arts Center | $30,000 |
| Black Women's Blueprint | $20,000 |
| Playgrounds for Palestine | $20,000 |
| The Clifton House | $10,000 |
| WISN | $10,000 |
| The Young Center | $10,000 |
| The Futuro Media Group | $10,000 |
| Techqueria | $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 (FY20–25, $336k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 18% 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
Grants abroad, by region — $448k on the FY2025 return
Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: Solidarity Projects
Stated purpose: Solidarity Projects
Stated purpose: Solidarity Projects
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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
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 +34% since the first grant, against -8% for the ones you funded once.
8 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 4 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, 58% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k 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
- TRTHE RECONCILIATION CENTER INC4× · 2017–2025 · $50k · revenue +167%
- EOEFFORTS OF GRACE INC2× · 2020–2025 · $50k · revenue +32%
HONOR THE EARTH2× · 2019–2022 · $30k · revenue +34%
Funded once
- CPCOMMUNITY PARTNERS INTERNATIONALgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $274k · revenue +68%
- ACACTM CORPone grant, 2022 · $171k · revenue -8%
- TATHE AFRICAN AMERICAN POLICY FORUM INCone grant, 2022 · $30k · revenue -40%
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.
To achieve legal and systematic change that addresses violence and discrimination against women and girls around the world.
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'…
Ending impunity for conflict related sexual violence
Global Network Building for Gender Equality and Women's Rights Activists: Fostering exchange, collaboration, and mutual support for joint efforts in capacity building and technical assistance, while deepening the understanding of gender…
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…
Girls for gender equity (gge) works intergenerationally, through a black feminist lens, to achieve gender and racial justice by centering the leadership of black girls and gender-expansive young people of color to reshape culture and…
World Pulse is a global social impact network connecting women from 227 countries to accelerate social change. We provide a safe and supportive online space where women can speak for themselves, make powerful connections, and access the…
Every Woman is a global coalition of more than 4,000 womens rights advocates and organisations in 165 nations advancing a treaty to end violence against women and girls in the form of a new Optional Protocol to CEDAW. We catalyse…
/The Rules is a global network of activists, organizers, designers, coders, researchers, writers and others dedicated to changing the rules that create inequality, climate change, and poverty around the world.
Women deliver is a global feminist advocacy organization with a clear mission: to ensure that every self-identifying girl and woman has control over her body and life. see organization's full mission statement in schedule o.
Asylee Women Enterprise (AWE), journeys with asylum seekers and other forced migrants as they navigate the immigration legal process, begin to heal from past trauma, and rebuild their lives in Baltimore.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The African American Policy Forum Inc and the most unlike its peers is Curious Communications 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 16 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 3% 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.
45 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. 45 of the 60 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 COMMUNITY PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds ACTM CORP ↗
- Who funds THE RECONCILIATION CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds EFFORTS OF GRACE INC ↗
- Who funds HONOR THE EARTH ↗
- Who funds THE AFRICAN AMERICAN POLICY FORUM INC ↗
- Who funds CURIOUS COMMUNICATIONS INC ↗
- Who funds NATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITY BOARD ↗
- Who funds THE YOUNG CENTER FOR IMMIGRANT CHILDRENS RIGHTS ↗
- Who funds BLACK ALLIANCE FOR JUST IMMIGRATION ↗
- Who funds Alianza Nacional de Campesinas Inc ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL GOOD FUND INC ↗
- Who funds The Clifton House ↗
- Who funds PROJECT SOUTH INC ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL PROSTATE CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PLAYGROUNDS FOR PALESTINE INC ↗
- Who funds CONNECT INC ↗
- Who funds SEVENTH GENERATION FUND FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES INC ↗
- Who funds COACH2EDIFY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Womens Community Justice Association Inc ↗
- Who funds Home for Contemporary Theatre and Art Ltd dba HERE Art Center ↗
- Who funds National Domestic Workers Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds TECHQUERIA ↗
- Who funds THE GIVING BACK FUND ↗
- Who funds FeministCom Foundation ↗
- Who funds MENDDIGAP INC ↗
- Who funds POWERPAC ORG ↗
- Who funds FRACTURED ATLAS 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: Tides Foundation · Novo Foundation · New York Women's Foundation Inc · The Ford Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Impactassetsinc · Groundswell Fund · Ms Foundation for Women Inc · Conrad N Hilton Foundation · Ag Foundation · Brooklyn Community Foundation
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 V-Day 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.
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 V-Day?
Find your warmest path to V-Day 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.