Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Private foundation

Warsh-Mott Legacy

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$1.2M
Granted FY2022
25
Grants FY2022
6
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

56% of Warsh-Mott Legacy’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Tides Foundation, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 34 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2022, the last year Warsh-Mott Legacy named its own grantees at scale: 20 organizations, $1M. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

31
’17
30
’18
17
’19
19
’20
13
’21
20
’22
35
’23
35
’24
34
’25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What you fund
0198% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.

Philanthropy$6.3MCivil Rights$2.7MEnvironment$2.6MPublic Benefit$1.5MFood & Nutrition$1.2MInternational$677kCommunity Improvement$521kEducation$415kOther$0
02FY2022 · 25 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2022

  • $10k–50k16 grants · $576k
  • $50k–250k9 grants · $580k
$45,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$51M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT$100,000
DEFENDING RIGHTS & DISSENT$70,000
GLOBAL EXCHANGE$70,000
INDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK$60,000
CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY$60,000
CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW$60,000
SIERRA CLUB$60,000
THE XERCES SOCIETY$50,000
WILLIAM J BRENNAN JR CENTER FOR JUSTICE INC$50,000
PROTEUS FUND INC$45,000
AMERICAN CONSTITUTION SOCIETY FOR LAW AND POLICY$45,000
CONSTITUTIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY CENTER$45,000
NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE FUND INC$45,000
INQUIRING SYSTEMS$42,800
FRIENDS OF THE ACTION GROUP ON EROSION TECHNOLOGY AND CONCENTRATION$41,820
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 (FY20–25, $250k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 60% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%SOLIDARITY STL INC: $15k → 21%ASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE - ATLANTA: $40k → 9%GEORGIA LATINO ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS: $50k → 14%ILLINOIS WORKERS IN ACTION: $20k → 7%ILLINOIS WORKERS IN ACTION: $20k → 8%SOLIDARITY STL INC: $15k → 21%ILLINOIS WORKERS IN ACTION: $20k → 7%SOLIDARITY STL INC: $15k → 21%INSTITUTO LAB: $10k → 11%TIDES CENTER: $45k → 10%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
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
SD
CA
CO
MO
MD
AZ
NM
NC
DC
HI
GA
TX

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 31% of Warsh-Mott Legacy’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.

Warsh-Mott Legacylessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$9.5M · 70 repeat orgs$1.9M to everyone else

70 repeat relationships — 20 still active in FY2022, 50 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call). Read against FY2022, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

70
29

Total granted

$9.5M
$994k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+21%
+54%

Still filing today

89%
59%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 49% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $750k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Civil RightsFood & NutritionEnvironmentInternationalCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitOther

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

  • FO
    Friends of Action Group on Erosion Technology and Concentration
    5× · 2018–2022 · $755k · revenue +545% · 53% of their budget
  • GA
    Government Accountability Project
    7× · 2017–2023 · $600k · revenue +49%
  • GE
    GLOBAL EXCHANGE
    5× · 2018–2025 · $365k · revenue +292%

Funded once

  • PC
    PUBLIC CITIZEN INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $125k · revenue +35%
  • PO
    PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT
    one grant, 2018 · $70k
  • EA
    Ecology Action of the Midpeninsula
    one grant, 2019 · $65k · revenue -17%

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
Asociacion Interamericana Para La Defensa Del Ambiente

To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.

Crime & Legal
2
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
3
Amazon Watch Inc

To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with Indigenous communities in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability, and the preservation of the Amazon Basin's…

Environment
4
Partnership for Policy Integrity

Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.

Environment
5
Common Future

Common future is a network of pioneering leaders across the u.s. and canada who work deeply within their communities to create alternative approaches to business, philanthropy, and investing. we envision an economy that has transitioned…

Community Improvement
6
The Alliance for Collective Action

The Alliance for Collective Action convenes leaders of environmental and social movements to advance solutions for a thriving planet. We advance our mission through the Alliance Center building and community, as well as through Collective…

Environment
7
CarbonPlan

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

Environment
8
Nature for Justice

To empower frontline communities to lead nature-based solutions that advance climate justice, ecosystem restoration, and resilient livelihoods through connecting locally-led initiatives to funding, markets, and technical support.

Environment
9
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
10
Indigenous Peoples Rights Inc

To lead and coordinate the global initiative to address and prevent criminalization, violence, and impunity against indigenous peoples towards strengthening their collectives, solidarity, and actions.

Human Services
11
Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide

Educational & charitable. to provide legal and scientific information to public interest attorneys and scientists in numerous countries.

—
12
Corporate Accountability Lab

The Organization unleashes the creative potential of the law to protect people and the planet from corporate abuse.

International

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is As You Sow and the most unlike its peers is The Ceres Trust. 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 backsteadyCommunity FoundationsImmigrant Worker SupportChristian Missionary Organi…Food Banks and PantriesLocal Food System Organizat…Environmental Conservation …Policy Research and Advocacy
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 24 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number24%4%<5yr15%13%5–10yr20%22%10–20yr17%28%20–35yr11%27%35–55yr13%7%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value24%1%<5yr15%3%5–10yr20%9%10–20yr17%22%20–35yr11%59%35–55yr13%7%55yr+

The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
1%1/100
the rest of the field
14%
26,003/186,878

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

98 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. 98 of the 122 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
29
Early backer (in before they grew)
97/98
Grantees still filing
58/98
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

TIDES FOUNDATION — $4,814,500 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUNDATIONMARIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $868,800 · PhilanthropyMARIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION+2 more — $90,000 · PhilanthropyMARIN FOUNDATION — $375,000 · OtherMARIN FOUNDATIONIndividual grant recipient — $241,000 · OtherAPOYO LEGAL AL EMPRENDIMIENTO COMUNITARIO INC (ALECI) — $180,000 · OtherWILLIAM J BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE INC — $350,000 · OtherWILLIAM J BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUST…AMERICAN CONSTITUTION SOCIETY FOR LAW & POLICY — $225,000 · OtherNATIVE MOVEMENT — $240,000 · OtherXERCES SOCIETY INC — $180,000 · OtherCONSTITUTIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY CENTER — $225,000 · Other+60 more — $3,159,100 · Other+60 moreFriends of Action Group on Erosion Technology and Concentration — $755,040 · Food & NutritionFriends of…INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURE & TRADE POLICY — $280,000 · Food & NutritionINSTITUTE …Center for Food Safety — $250,000 · Food & NutritionCenter for…Ecology Action of the Midpeninsula — $65,000 · Food & NutritionCOMEDORES SOCIALES DE PUERTO RICO INC — $60,000 · Food & NutritionPARCELERAS AFROCARIBENAS POR LA TRANSFORM BARRIAL — $60,000 · Food & Nutrition+4 more — $90,000 · Food & Nutrition+4 moreCENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS — $460,000 · Civil RightsPARTNERSHIPFORCIVILJUSTICEFUND — $250,000 · Civil RightsDEFENDING RIGHTS AND DISSENT INC — $175,000 · Civil RightsThe Center for Media Justice DBA MediaJustice — $132,500 · Civil RightsCULTURAL SURVIVAL INC — $60,000 · Civil RightsBVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE INC — $50,000 · Civil RightsSOMOS SIEMBRA — $50,000 · Civil Rights+6 more — $180,000 · Civil RightsGovernment Accountability Project — $600,000 · Public BenefitPUBLIC CITIZEN FOUNDATION INC — $465,000 · Public BenefitPUBLIC CITIZEN INC — $125,000 · Public BenefitPROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT INC — $80,000 · Public BenefitFUND FOR CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT — $60,000 · Public Benefit+1 more — $25,000 · Public BenefitGLOBAL EXCHANGE — $365,000 · InternationalCENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW INC — $300,000 · InternationalNATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE FUND INC — $170,000 · InternationalINSTITUTE FOR FOOD AND DEVELOPMENT POLICY INC — $120,000 · InternationalSOUTH AFRICA DEVELOPMENT FUND INC — $82,400 · InternationalFEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS — $75,000 · InternationalAlianza Americas — $60,000 · International+2 more — $22,500 · InternationalSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION — $330,000 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE EARTH — $140,000 · EnvironmentNEW VENTURE FUND — $115,000 · EnvironmentGLOBAL JUSTICE ECOLOGY PROJECT INC — $80,000 · EnvironmentCLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANCE — $70,000 · EnvironmentAINA MOMONA — $60,000 · EnvironmentKAHEA THE HAWAIIAN ENVIRONMENTAL ALLIANCE — $60,000 · EnvironmentCLEAN WATER FUND — $60,000 · EnvironmentPesticide Action Network North America — $50,000 · Environment+3 more — $75,000 · Environment
Philanthropy$5,773,300Other$5,175,100Food & Nutrition$1,560,040Civil Rights$1,357,500Public Benefit$1,355,000International$1,194,900Environment$1,040,000

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 budgetTIDES FOUNDATION — $4,814,500 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetMARIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $868,800 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetFriends of Action Group on Erosion Technology and Concentration — $755,040 over 5y, 53% of budgetGovernment Accountability Project — $600,000 over 7y, 6.2% of budgetPUBLIC CITIZEN FOUNDATION INC — $465,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetCENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS — $460,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetGLOBAL EXCHANGE — $365,000 over 5y, 4.7% of budgetWILLIAM J BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE INC — $350,000 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION — $330,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetCENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW INC — $300,000 over 5y, 2.6% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURE & TRADE POLICY — $280,000 over 5y, 7.4% of budgetPARTNERSHIPFORCIVILJUSTICEFUND — $250,000 over 4y, 30% of budgetCenter for Food Safety — $250,000 over 4y, 2.0% of budgetNATIVE MOVEMENT — $240,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetAMERICAN CONSTITUTION SOCIETY FOR LAW & POLICY — $225,000 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetCONSTITUTIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY CENTER — $225,000 over 5y, 2.0% of budgetXERCES SOCIETY INC — $180,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetDEFENDING RIGHTS AND DISSENT INC — $175,000 over 3y, 6.8% of budgetNATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE FUND INC — $170,000 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetPROTEUS FUND INC — $150,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetWHYHUNGER INC — $140,000 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE EARTH — $140,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetThe Center for Media Justice DBA MediaJustice — $132,500 over 6y, 1.6% of budgetFREE PRESS — $132,500 over 6y, 0.8% of budgetNATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD FOUNDATION INC — $130,000 over 4y, 5.3% of budgetPUBLIC CITIZEN INC — $125,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR FOOD AND DEVELOPMENT POLICY INC — $120,000 over 2y, 10% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND — $115,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetILLUMINATIVE INC — $115,000 over 2y, 16% of budgetINQUIRING SYSTEMS INC — $85,600 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetSOUTH AFRICA DEVELOPMENT FUND INC — $82,400 over 2y, 4.5% of budgetGLOBAL JUSTICE ECOLOGY PROJECT INC — $80,000 over 2y, 7.4% of budgetPROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT INC — $80,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetFEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS — $75,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetAS YOU SOW — $70,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetCLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANCE — $70,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetMOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER — $65,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetEcology Action of the Midpeninsula — $65,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetHAWAII PEACE AND JUSTICE — $60,000 over 3y, 8.1% of budgetAINA MOMONA — $60,000 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetMIIGWECH INC — $60,000 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetILLINIOS WORKERS IN ACTION — $60,000 over 3y, 17% of budgetFUND FOR CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT — $60,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetKOIHONUA — $60,000 over 2y, 3.1% of budgetKAHEA THE HAWAIIAN ENVIRONMENTAL ALLIANCE — $60,000 over 3y, 22% of budgetAlianza Americas — $60,000 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetCOMEDORES SOCIALES DE PUERTO RICO INC — $60,000 over 3y, 3.0% of budgetRURAL COMMUNITY WORKERS ALLIANCE — $60,000 over 2y, 13% 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.

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.

Cs FundAmalgamated Charitabl…Tides FoundationNew Venture FundFoundation to Promote…Rsf Social Finance IncThe Schmidt Family Fo…Common Counsel Founda…ImpactassetsincWindward FundWallace Global Fund IIRockefeller Philanthr…
Cs FundCA76.3× affinity34 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Cs Fund · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Tides Foundation · New Venture Fund · Foundation to Promote Open Society · Rsf Social Finance Inc · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Common Counsel Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Windward Fund · Wallace Global Fund II · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc

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 Warsh-Mott Legacy 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 60%3%10%23%40%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 22%
  • Xerces Society Inc — 22% of income from government
  • Code for Science & Society Inc — 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
6get no government money at all
11report 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

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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Warsh-Mott Legacy?

Find your warmest path to Warsh-Mott Legacy 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 122 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 2022, released 2022. 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