Skip to content
Violence Free Minnesota at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Violence Free Minnesota

To represent victim/survivors of relationship abuse and member programs; challenge systems and institutions; promote social change; and support, educate, and connect member programs.

$323k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$31k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through 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, FY2022 to 2025.

Human Services$355kHealth$64kSocial Science$32kArts & Culture$31kCommunity Improvement$22kCrime & Legal$21kYouth Development$20kEducation$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $30,525, the rows itemized in this filing. The $322,592 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $292,067 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$30,525
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Speaking Out Collective$30,525
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 (FY24–24, $78k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Transforming Generations: $78k → 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.
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 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
Turning Point Advocacy Services

Our mission is to assist survivors and their children in learning to overcome the cycle of physical, sexual, mental, and emotional health.

Health
2
Safehouse Denver Inc

Safehouse denver assists adult, children, and youth in reclaiming their right to a life free from domestic violence. the agency provides a broad spectrum of culturally competent, trauma-informed services, including but not limited to,…

Human Services
3
Clackamas Women's Services

Breaking the isolation of domestic and sexual violence.

Human Services
4
Capital Area Family Violence Intervention Center Inc

To end domestic violence in the capital area through serving victims of domestic violence, educating the public about domestic violence, and working to eliminate economic, social and cultural conditions and attitudes that contribute to…

Human Services
5
Women Against Abuse Inc

The mission of women against abuse is to provide quality, compassionate, and nonjudgmental services in a manner that fosters self-respect and independence in persons experiencing intimate partner violence and to lead the struggle to end…

Human Services
6
Dove House Advocacy Services

With wrap-around services, dove house seeks to address the needs of victimes of domestic violence, sexual assaultm and general crime in jefferson county as they navigate the many systems required to move from being victims to surviving and…

—
7
Domestic Violence Safe Options Svcs

Aid victims of domestic violence/assualt

—
8
Safe Avenues

Safe avenues mission is to provide advocacy, parenting time services, and emergency shelter to victims of domestic and sexual violence.

Human Services
9
Anna Marie's Alliance

Provide education, intervention and advocacy to those affected by relationship abuse with a holistic approach and anti-oppression focus.

Human Services
10
Cleveland County Abuse Prevention Council Inc

The Abuse Prevention Council provides emergency, advocacy, counseling, education and specialized services for victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and homeless individuals and families.

Crime & Legal
11
Lake County Crisis Center

A safe place is the leading advocate for eliminating domestic violence & human trafficking in northern illinois.

—
12
Womens Resource Center of Newport and Bristol Counties

The women's resource center empowers survivors by providing trauma-informed services with equity and compassion while working collaboratively with the community to eliminate the root causes of interpersonal abuse.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Women's Advocates Inc; the most unlike its peers is Breaking Free. 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

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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/20
Grantees still filing
12/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TRANSFORMING GENERATIONS TG: $102,708 · Human ServicesTRANSFORMING GENERATIONS TGCornerstone Advocacy Service: $63,165 · Human ServicesCornerstone Advocacy ServiceWOMEN OF NATIONS: $38,000 · Human ServicesWOMEN OF NATIONSSEWA-AIFW: $29,618 · Human ServicesSEWA-AIFWAsian Women United of Minnesota: $24,387 · Human ServicesAsian Women United of MinnesotaALEXANDRA HOUSE INC: $18,000 · Human ServicesALEXANDRA HOUSE INCESPERANZA UNITED: $15,440 · Human ServicesHOPE CENTER: $12,200 · Human ServicesSojourner Project Inc: $11,248 · Human Services+2 more: $16,982 · Human ServicesHampton Inn LF3 Eagan TRS LLC (37-1942818): $45,000 · OtherHampton Inn LF3 Eagan …CURA FOUNDATION: $19,189 · OtherCURA FOUNDATIONSOMEPLACE SAFE: $11,022 · OtherSOMEPLACE SAFEOasis of Love: $9,500 · OtherOasis of LoveTUBMAN: $11,410 · OtherTUBMANTHINKSELF INC: $9,500 · OtherTHINKSELF INCBREAKING FREE: $7,417 · OtherBREAKING FREEPHUMULANI: $32,193 · Social ScienceSpeaking Out Collective: $30,525 · Arts & CultureMCLEOD ALLIANCE: $22,353 · Community ImprovementNational Network to End Domestic Violence Inc: $19,875 · Youth DevelopmentWOMEN'S ADVOCATES INC: $14,158 · Housing & Shelter
Human Services$331,748Other$113,038Social Science$32,193Arts & Culture$30,525Community Improvement$22,353Youth Development$19,875Housing & Shelter$14,158

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTRANSFORMING GENERATIONS TG: $102,708 over 2y, 4.9% of budgetCornerstone Advocacy Service: $63,165 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetWOMEN OF NATIONS: $38,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetSpeaking Out Collective: $30,525 over 1y, 6.6% of budgetSEWA-AIFW: $29,618 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetAsian Women United of Minnesota: $24,387 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetMCLEOD ALLIANCE: $22,353 over 1y, 10% of budgetNational Network to End Domestic Violence Inc: $19,875 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetALEXANDRA HOUSE INC: $18,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetESPERANZA UNITED: $15,440 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetWOMEN'S ADVOCATES INC: $14,158 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetHOPE CENTER: $12,200 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetTUBMAN: $11,410 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSojourner Project Inc: $11,248 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSOMEPLACE SAFE: $11,022 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE ST PAUL AND RAMSEY COUNTY DOMESTIC ABUSE INTERVENTION PROJECT: $10,332 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetTHINKSELF INC: $9,500 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetBREAKING FREE: $7,417 over 1y, 38% of budgetWOMENS RURAL ADVOCACY PROGRAMS: $6,650 over 1y, 1.2% 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.

Otto Bremer TrustSaint Paul & Minnesot…Greater Twin Cities U…The Minneapolis Found…Women's Foundation of…Edina Realty Foundati…Hrk FoundationWca FoundationOpen Your Heart to th…Patrick and Aimee But…Fr Bigelow FoundationPohlad Family Foundat…
Otto Bremer TrustMN30.2× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Otto Bremer Trust · Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation · Greater Twin Cities United Way · The Minneapolis Foundation · Women's Foundation of Minnesota · Edina Realty Foundation · Hrk Foundation · Wca Foundation · Open Your Heart to the Hungry and Homeless · Patrick and Aimee Butler Family · Fr Bigelow Foundation · Pohlad Family 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 Violence Free Minnesota funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Violence Free Minnesota. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    10report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely 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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Violence Free Minnesota?

    Find your warmest path to Violence Free Minnesota 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Violence Free Minnesota’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