Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Private foundation

Wallace Research 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.

$4.4M
Granted FY2024still arriving
34
Grants FY2024still arriving
15
States reached
$400k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.

Environment$14MArts & Culture$4.9MHealth$3.6MAnimals$3.4MScience & Tech$2.4MEducation$2.1MReligion$1.4MFood & Nutrition$1.1MOther$0
02FY2024 · 34 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k10 grants · $355k
  • $50k–250k20 grants · $2.8M
  • $250k+4 grants · $1.3M
$100,000
Median grant
15
States reached
$75M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WILDCOAST$400,000
WILD SALMON CENTER$400,000
MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY$270,000
POLYBIO RESEARCH FOUNDATION$250,000
WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION$220,000
URBANPROMISE INTERNATIONAL INC$210,000
PARTNERSHIP FOR THE DELAWARE ESTUARY$200,000
POLYBIO RESEARCH FOUNDATION$200,000
ARCHAEOLOGY SOUTHWEST$200,000
SHORERIVERS INC$180,000
MASSACHUSETTS AUDUBON SOCIETY$172,000
THE WALLACE CENTERS OF IOWA$167,000
EASTERN SHORE LAND CONSERVANCY$150,000
WILDCOAST$146,700
ARIZONA LAND AND WATER TRUST$142,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY19–24, $339k) 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.

area typical 10%OLD PINE COMMUNITY CENTER: $25k → 22%EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $64k → 15%EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $50k → 15%EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $50k → 15%EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $50k → 15%EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $50k → 15%EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $50k → 15%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

AK
VT
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
IA
PA
NJ
CT
CA
UT
CO
MO
MD
DE
AZ
NM
TN
NC
SC
DC
HI
TX
FL

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.

04

Where the work is directed

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

About 7% of Wallace Research Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.

Wallace Research Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 8.8% directed abroad (not shown)

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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$30M · 50 repeat orgs$3.9M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +58% since the first grant, against +35% for the ones you funded once.

50 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2024, 29 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

50
33

Total granted

$30M
$2.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+58%
+35%

Still filing today

70%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.3M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentAnimalsEducationArts & CultureInternationalHuman ServicesOther

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

  • AS
    Archaeology Southwest
    8× · 2017–2024 · $3.8M · revenue +58% · 32% of their budget
  • W
    WILDCOAST
    8× · 2017–2024 · $2.4M · revenue +80%
  • WILD SALMON CENTER
    7× · 2018–2024 · $2.1M · revenue +274%

Funded once

  • P
    POLYBIO
    one grant, 2023 · $570k
  • HW
    Humane World for Animals Internationalgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $160k · revenue +114%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
    one grant, 2022 · $150k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
2
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
3
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
4
Sustainable Conservation

Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…

Environment
5
Nature and Culture International

Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.

Environment
6
Cascadia Wildlands

Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…

Environment
7
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
8
Sky Island Alliance

We work to connect people, wildlife, and lands across the u.s.-mexico border through the use of science, advocacy, educational activities, community engagement, and on-the-ground conservation initiatives. our main activities include…

Environment
9
Tucson Audubon Society

Inspire people to enjoy and protect birds through recreation, education, conservation, and restoration of the environment, upon which we all depend.

Animals
10
California Institute of Environmental Studies

The institute is dedicated to scientific research, the results of which are used to promote public awareness and education in the areas of conservation biology and ecology,including the wise use of natural resources.

Animals
11
California Institute for Biodiversity

Create and publish educational materials, conduct professional development, promote awareness, and sponsor research on the spectacular biological diversity of the State of CA.

Education
12
Turtle Island Restoration Network

To mobilize people in local communities around the world to protect marine wildlife and the oceans and inland watersheds that sustain them.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wild Salmon Center and the most unlike its peers is A T Still University of Health Sciences. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyEnvironmental Conservation …Cancer Support ServicesChristian Missionary Organi…Health Access Advocacy and …Policy Research and AdvocacyAnimal Rescue and ShelterImmigrant Worker SupportCommunity Arts CentersFood Banks and PantriesDance Arts OrganizationsCommunity Foundations
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 31 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%2%<5yr14%2%5–10yr19%16%10–20yr16%36%20–35yr13%25%35–55yr16%20%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%2%<5yr14%2%5–10yr19%10%10–20yr16%33%20–35yr13%36%35–55yr16%17%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/70
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,495

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.

05the grantee network

66 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. 66 of the 91 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
18
Early backer (in before they grew)
65/66
Grantees still filing
48/66
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Archaeology Southwest — $3,816,000 · OtherArchaeology SouthwestMICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY — $820,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA — $809,022 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY - ARIZONA — $778,500 · OtherHOLY CROSS MONASTERY — $750,000 · OtherANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEYS INC — $633,000 · OtherRURAL & MIGRANT MINISTRY INC — $621,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY - TENNESSEE — $614,300 · OtherPOLYBIO — $570,000 · OtherYALE UNIVERSITY — $541,778 · Other+34 more — $6,276,444 · Other+34 moreWILDCOAST — $2,444,700 · EnvironmentWILDCOASTTOHONO CHUL PARK INC — $1,169,000 · EnvironmentTOHONO CHUL PARK INCMASSACHUSETTS AUDUBON SOCIETY INC — $1,012,000 · EnvironmentMASSACHUSETTS AUDUBON …TUCSON BOTANICAL GARDENS — $481,000 · EnvironmentTUCSON BOTANICAL GARDE…PENNENVIRONMENT RESEARCH & POLICY CENTER INC — $290,000 · EnvironmentARIZONA LAND AND WATER TRUST INC — $272,000 · Environment+10 more — $1,285,000 · Environment+10 moreWILD SALMON CENTER — $2,150,000 · AnimalsWILD SALMON CENTERWILDLIFE ALLIANCE INC — $960,000 · AnimalsWILDLIFE ALLIANCE …EcoHealth Alliance Inc — $750,000 · AnimalsEcoHealth Alliance…Lewa Wildlife Conservancy USA — $600,000 · AnimalsLewa Wildlife Cons…AGR Foundation Inc — $552,000 · AnimalsAGR Foundation Inc+6 more — $567,000 · Animals+6 moreThe Climate Center — $1,075,000 · EducationYale University — $651,410 · EducationTHE LOOMIS INSTITUTE D/B/A THE LOOMIS CHAFFEE SCHOOL — $500,000 · EducationSouthern AZ Research Science & Eng FDN — $420,000 · Education+3 more — $75,000 · EducationURBANPROMISE INTERNATIONAL — $748,000 · InternationalGIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA — $230,000 · InternationalTOSTAN INC — $150,000 · International+2 more — $65,000 · InternationalWOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION — $1,060,000 · Science & Tech+1 more — $30,000 · Science & TechBROOKFIELD CRAFT CENTER INC — $390,500 · Arts & CultureDancing Classrooms Inc — $288,460 · Arts & CultureTHE WALLACE CENTERS OF IOWA — $167,000 · Arts & CultureARIZONA-SONORA DESERT MUSEUM — $80,000 · Arts & CultureINTERNATIONAL HERPETOLOGICAL SYMPOSIUM INC — $43,250 · Arts & Culture+1 more — $10,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$16,230,044Environment$6,953,700Animals$5,579,000Education$2,721,410International$1,193,000Science & Tech$1,090,000Arts & Culture$979,210

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetArchaeology Southwest — $3,816,000 over 8y, 32% of budgetWILDCOAST — $2,444,700 over 8y, 14% of budgetWILD SALMON CENTER — $2,150,000 over 7y, 5.0% of budgetTOHONO CHUL PARK INC — $1,169,000 over 6y, 10% of budgetThe Climate Center — $1,075,000 over 6y, 12% of budgetWOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION — $1,060,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetMASSACHUSETTS AUDUBON SOCIETY INC — $1,012,000 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetWILDLIFE ALLIANCE INC — $960,000 over 8y, 2.6% of budgetEcoHealth Alliance Inc — $750,000 over 3y, 2.2% of budgetURBANPROMISE INTERNATIONAL — $748,000 over 5y, 8.8% of budgetYale University — $651,410 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEYS INC — $633,000 over 4y, 3.3% of budgetRURAL & MIGRANT MINISTRY INC — $621,000 over 6y, 6.9% of budgetLewa Wildlife Conservancy USA — $600,000 over 5y, 4.9% of budgetAGR Foundation Inc — $552,000 over 5y, 36% of budgetTHE LOOMIS INSTITUTE D/B/A THE LOOMIS CHAFFEE SCHOOL — $500,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetUniversity of Michigan — $500,000 over 2y, 77% of budgetTUCSON BOTANICAL GARDENS — $481,000 over 6y, 4.8% of budgetCommunity Food Bank Inc — $460,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetPOLYBIO RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC — $450,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetSouthern AZ Research Science & Eng FDN — $420,000 over 8y, 8.3% of budgetBROOKFIELD CRAFT CENTER INC — $390,500 over 5y, 24% of budgetTUCSON CENTERS FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN INC DBA EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE — $314,000 over 6y, 1.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC — $310,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPENNENVIRONMENT RESEARCH & POLICY CENTER INC — $290,000 over 4y, 12% of budgetDancing Classrooms Inc — $288,460 over 3y, 5.2% of budgetARIZONA LAND AND WATER TRUST INC — $272,000 over 3y, 3.8% of budgetArizona Greyhound & Animal Rescue Fund — $260,000 over 3y, 55% of budgetPOUGHKEEPSIE FARM PROJECT — $256,000 over 2y, 20% of budgetTHE JOHN BARTRAM ASSOCIATION — $255,000 over 4y, 2.9% of budgetGIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA — $230,000 over 3y, 7.7% of budgetTHE CARL SAFINA CENTER INC THE SAFINA CENTER — $225,000 over 2y, 20% of budgetPARTNERSHIP FOR THE DELAWARE ESTUARY INC — $200,000 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetSHORERIVERS INC — $180,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetThe Amerind Foundation Inc — $167,885 over 3y, 4.9% of budgetTHE WALLACE CENTERS OF IOWA — $167,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetHumane World for Animals International — $160,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetEASTERN SHORE LAND CONSERVANCY INC — $150,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetTOSTAN INC — $150,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetTHE CORAL RESTORATION FOUNDATION INC — $140,000 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetBLEEDING & CLOTTING DISORDERS INSTITUTE — $135,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetHAWK MOUNTAIN SANCTUARY ASSOCIATION — $117,000 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetCATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER INC — $100,000 over 1y, 6.9% of budgetTHE DIGDEEP RIGHT TO WATER PROJECT — $100,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetREGIONAL FOOD BANK OF NORTHEASTERN NEW YORK INC — $100,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetYOUTH OUTDOOR EXPERIENCE — $100,000 over 2y, 14% of budgetTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS — $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Primavera Foundation Inc — $100,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budget
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 Archaeology Southwest ↗
  • Who funds WILDCOAST ↗
  • Who funds WILD SALMON CENTER ↗
  • Who funds TOHONO CHUL PARK INC ↗
  • Who funds The Climate Center ↗
  • Who funds WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION ↗
  • Who funds MASSACHUSETTS AUDUBON SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds WILDLIFE ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds EcoHealth Alliance Inc ↗
  • Who funds URBANPROMISE INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds Yale University ↗
  • Who funds ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEYS INC ↗
  • Who funds RURAL & MIGRANT MINISTRY INC ↗
  • Who funds Lewa Wildlife Conservancy USA ↗
  • Who funds AGR Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE LOOMIS INSTITUTE D/B/A THE LOOMIS CHAFFEE SCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds University of Michigan ↗
  • Who funds TUCSON BOTANICAL GARDENS ↗
  • Who funds Community Food Bank Inc ↗
  • Who funds POLYBIO RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Southern AZ Research Science & Eng FDN ↗
  • Who funds BROOKFIELD CRAFT CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds TUCSON CENTERS FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN INC DBA EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE ↗
  • Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
  • Who funds PENNENVIRONMENT RESEARCH & POLICY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds Dancing Classrooms Inc ↗
  • Who funds ARIZONA LAND AND WATER TRUST INC ↗
  • Who funds Arizona Greyhound & Animal Rescue Fund ↗
  • Who funds POUGHKEEPSIE FARM PROJECT ↗

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.

Community Foundation …National Fish and Wil…PatagoniaorgSouthwest Foundation …Frederick Gardner Cot…The Pew Charitable Tr…Arizona Community Fou…The Hs Lopez Family F…Texas Instruments Fou…Resources Legacy FundThe Nature ConservancyDavid S & Norma R Lew…
Community Foundation for Southern ArizonaAZ32.7× affinity14 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation for Southern Arizona · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Southwest Foundation for Education & Historical Preservation · Frederick Gardner Cottrell Foundation · The Pew Charitable Trusts · Arizona Community Foundation · The Hs Lopez Family Foundation · Texas Instruments Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · The Nature Conservancy · David S & Norma R Lewis 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 Wallace Research Foundation 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%6%23%51%90%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 24%
  • Eastern Shore Land Conservancy Inc — 100% of income from government
  • Partnership for the Delaware Estuary Inc — 69% of income from government
  • Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution — 63% of income from government
  • Wild Salmon Center — 49% of income from government
  • EcoHealth Alliance Inc — 24% of income from government
  • The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc — 16% of income from government
  • Shorerivers Inc — 13% of income from government
  • Yale University — 12% of income from government
  • Giraffe Conservation Foundation Usa — 2% of income from government
  • Massachusetts Audubon Society Inc — 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
14report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
3rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 91 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines