Skip to content
Waking Up Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Waking Up Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$705k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$300k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Education$1.2MScience & Tech$1.1MInternational$1.1MHealth$375kSocial Science$250kHuman Services$230kPhilanthropy$215kFood & Nutrition$150kOther$0
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $150k
  • $250k+2 grants · $550k
$100,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SAFE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FORUM INSTITUTE$300,000
THE RAND CORPORATION$250,000
EFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUNDATION USA INC$100,000
GIVEDIRECTLY INC$50,000
LOTUS TREASURE$4,700
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.

US giving: 70% of grant dollars ($3.4M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 30% that went abroad ($1.4M) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY21–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 64% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $200k → 7%SECUREBIO INC: $270k → 8%PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE: $250k → 16%MALARIA CONSORTIUM US INC: $40k → 13%EFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUNDATION USA INC: $426k → 10%THE RAND CORPORATION: $250k → 14%DONGYU GATSAL LING INITIATIVES INCORPORATED: $10k → 6%DOCTORS WITHOUT BOARDERS MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES: $200k → 17%SAFE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FORUM INSTITUTE: $300k → 20%THE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $100k → 14%LOTUS TREASURE: $5k → 12%JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $125k → 19%CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $50k → 16%EFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUNDATION USA INC: $130k → 10%BE HERD FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%FOUNDERS PLEDGE INC: $120k → 17%THE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $50k → 14%JOHN HOPKINS UNIVERSITYDEVELOPMENT: $125k → 19%SIGHTSAVERS INC: $50k → 16%EFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUNDATION USA INC: $100k → 10%INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE: $100k → 17%PLOUGSHARES FUND: $50k → 14%INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE: $80k → 17%HORIZON INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC SERVICE: $74k → 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.

Beyond the US: 30% of all-years giving ($1.4M)

2 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Netherlands$880k · 4 grants
United Kingdom$550k · 1 grant
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 18% of Waking Up Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Waking Up Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 15% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

27%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 4 repeat orgs$3.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +18% since the first grant, against +4% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
17

Total granted

$1.2M
$2.7M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
+4%

Still filing today

100%
59%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 21% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $555k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
HealthEducationInternationalScience & TechPhilanthropyReligionOther
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

  • EV
    EFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUNDATION USA INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $656k · revenue -68%
  • GIVEDIRECTLY INC
    2× · 2022–2024 · $230k · revenue +18%
  • IR
    International Rescue Committee INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $180k · revenue +38%

Funded once

  • TR
    THE RESPONSIBLE AI COLLABORATIVE
    one grant, 2022 · $550k
  • CF
    CENTER FOR EFFECTIVE ALTRUISM USA INC
    one grant, 2022 · $330k
  • SI
    SECUREBIO INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $270k · revenue +70%
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
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
2
Fajr Scientific

To provide multi-specialty surgical care, humanitarian aid and educational support to people in low- and middle-income countries.

Science & Tech
3
MRIGlobal

To improve the lives of people through innovative scientific and engineering research.

Science & Tech
4
International Biomedical Research Alliance

Our mission is to invest in and accelerate the development of the most promising future leaders in biomedical research with global impact.

Health
5
Clarity Ai Research Inc

Transluce is an independent research lab that builds open, scalable technology for understanding ai systems and steering them in the public interest.

Science & Tech
6
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
7
Iit Research Institute

Perform basic research and preclinical efficacy assessments of new molecular entities being developed for the prevention and treatment of cancer and infectious disease. Discover new pathways and targets for the design and development of…

Science & Tech
8
The International Institute for Strategic Studies - Us

To provide accurate, objective information and analysis on international strategic issues for legislators, diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business leaders, economists, the military, defense commentators, journalists,…

International
9
Future Tech Insights Inc

The organization provides public education on artificial intelligence.

Public Benefit
10
Activate Global Inc

Activate empowers scientists to reinvent the world by bringing their research to market. activate partners with u.s. based funders, research institutions, and other pillars of the hard technology community to help entrepreneurial…

Environment
11
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
12
American Association for the Advancement of Science

Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…

Science & Tech
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Effective Ventures Foundation Usa Inc; the most unlike its peers is Lotus Treasure. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

19 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 19 of the 26 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/19
Grantees still filing
9/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE RESPONSIBLE AI COLLABORATIVE: $550,000 · OtherTHE RESPONSIBLE AI COLLABORATIVECENTER FOR EFFECTIVE ALTRUISM USA INC: $330,000 · OtherCENTER FOR EFFECTIVE ALTRUISM USA INCSAFE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FORUM INSTITUTE: $300,000 · OtherSAFE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FORUM INSTITUTECOALITION FOR EDIPEMIC PREPAREDNESS: $250,000 · OtherCOALITION FOR EDIPEMIC PREPAREDNESSIndividual grant recipient: $205,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientJOHN HOPKINS UNIVERSITYDEVELOPMENT: $125,000 · OtherJOHN HOPKINS UNIVERSITYDEVELOPMENTCENTRE FOR EFFECTIVE ALTRUISM USA INC: $95,000 · OtherFOUNDERS PLEDGE INC: $120,000 · OtherTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $150,000 · OtherTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC+5 more: $188,700 · Other+5 moreEFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUNDATION USA INC: $656,000 · EducationEFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUND…President and Fellows of Harvard College: $250,000 · EducationPresident and Fellows of…JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $125,000 · EducationJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITYMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $200,000 · InternationalInternational Rescue Committee INC: $180,000 · InternationalALZHEIMER'S DISEASE RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $200,000 · HealthSIGHTSAVERS INC: $50,000 · HealthTREAT Humanity formerly Be Herd Foundation: $50,000 · HealthMALARIA CONSORTIUM US INC: $40,000 · HealthSECUREBIO INC: $270,000 · Science & TechThe Rand Corporation: $250,000 · Public BenefitGIVEDIRECTLY INC: $230,000 · Human Services
Other$2,313,700Education$1,031,000International$380,000Health$340,000Science & Tech$270,000Public Benefit$250,000Human Services$230,000

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 budgetEFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUNDATION USA INC: $656,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetSAFE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FORUM INSTITUTE: $300,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetSECUREBIO INC: $270,000 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $250,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Rand Corporation: $250,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGIVEDIRECTLY INC: $230,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $200,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $200,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $180,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $150,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $125,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOUNDERS PLEDGE INC: $120,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetHORIZON INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE: $74,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetSIGHTSAVERS INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTREAT Humanity formerly Be Herd Foundation: $50,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetCLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMALARIA CONSORTIUM US INC: $40,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetDONGYU GATSAL LING INITIATIVES INCORPORATED: $10,000 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.

Good Ventures Foundat…Silicon Valley Commun…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Good Ventures FoundationCA17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Good Ventures Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Waking Up Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Waking Up Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 12%
  • Johns Hopkins University: 12% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get 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 · 0–90%
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.

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 26 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Waking Up’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