Skip to content

· Private foundation

William and Maria Iberti Charitable Foundation

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.

$22k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

International$65kCivil Rights$46kHealth$12kHuman Services$5kAnimals$4kPublic Benefit$2kEnvironment$2k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$3,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$123k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ACLU$10,000
DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS$5,000
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER$3,000
MECA$2,000
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL$2,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 96% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%OXFAM: $3k → 16%MECA: $4k → 10%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $5k → 17%FINCA INTERNATIONAL: $2k → 14%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: $5k → 18%THE NEW GEORGIA PROJECTS: $2k → 14%COUNCIL ON AGING: $2k → 7%OXFAM: $2k → 16%MECA: $3k → 10%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $5k → 17%FINCA: $1k → 14%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER (SPLC): $5k → 18%COUNCIL ON AGING: $1k → 7%MECA: $2k → 10%DOCTORS WO BORDERS: $4k → 17%FINCA: $1k → 14%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER (SPLC): $5k → 18%COUNCIL ON AGING: $1k → 7%MECA: $2k → 10%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $4k → 17%FINCA: $1k → 14%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: $4k → 18%MECA: $2k → 10%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $3k → 17%FINCA: $540 → 14%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: $3k → 18%DOCTORS WO BORDERS: $3k → 17%MECA: $550 → 14%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: $3k → 18%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $3k → 17%MECA: $550 → 14%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: $3k → 18%DOCTORS WO BORDERS: $3k → 17%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER (SPLC): $3k → 18%AMNISTY INTERNATIONAL: $2k → 17%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER (SPLC): $2k → 18%MADRE: $2k → 17%MADRE: $2k → 17%DOCTORS WO BORDERS: $2k → 17%MADRE: $1k → 17%AMNISTY INTERNATIONAL: $1k → 17%MADRE: $1k → 17%AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: $5k → 17%AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: $4k → 17%AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: $3k → 17%AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: $2k → 17%AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: $2k → 17%ACLU: $10k → 17%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.
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 8% of William and Maria Iberti Charitable Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

William and Maria Iberti Charitable Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$122k · 13 repeat orgs$13k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +31% since the first grant, against -93% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
2

Total granted

$122k
$3k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
-93%

Still filing today

54%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
InternationalCrime & LegalHuman ServicesCivil RightsOther
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

  • SP
    SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $33k · revenue +10%
  • MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $20k · revenue +20%
  • ME
    MIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE
    5× · 2021–2025 · $13k · revenue +165%

Funded once

  • NEW GEORGIA PROJECT INC
    one grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue -93%
  • FF
    FLAGG FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2024 · $1k
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
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
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
3
International Development Enterprises

See schedule o for a more detailed description of ide's mission statement and achievements.

International
4
Nuru International

Nuru is a global collective that enables inclusive and sustainable prosperity by identifying communities at the stability tipping point, strengthening rural livelihoods and market systems, and fostering stabilizing connections that repair…

International
5
Alight

Alight builds a meaningful life for and with the displaced. not simply addressing basic needs, but building a life filled with joy, dignity, connection, and purpose. we walk with them along their entire journey of displacement and deliver…

International
6
Middle East Investment Initiative Inc

Middle east investment initiative, inc. (meii) stimulates sustainable economic activity and long-lasting job creation in the middle east and north africa (mena) by designing and deploying finance and technical assistance programs to…

Community Improvement
7
Human Rights Watch Inc

Human rights watch ("hrw") defends the rights of people worldwide. we scrupulously investigate abuses, expose the facts widely, and pressure those with power to respect rights and secure justice. human rights watch is an independent,…

International
8
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
9
Mercy for Animals Inc

Mercy for animals' mission is to construct a compassionate food system that is not just kind to animals but essential for the future of our planet and all who share it. our vision of a world where animals are respected, protected, and free…

Animals
10
Namati Inc

Namati, inc. (namati) is dedicated to putting the law in people's hands. we strive to build a just world, in which every one of us can take part in the decisions and demand accountability from the institutions that affect our lives.…

Crime & Legal
11
Pact Inc

Pact is a nonprofit organization that builds evidence-based, data-driven, and community-led solutions for human development (continued in schedule o)

International
12
Partnersglobal

Partnersglobal (partners) works through a global network to support local leaders and create partnerships that transform conflict, strengthen democratic institutions, and achieve sustainable development.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Medecins Sans Frontieres Usa Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Flag Foundation. 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

8 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. 8 of the 16 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $20,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INCAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INC: $16,200 · InternationalAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INCMIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE: $13,000 · InternationalMIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCEMADRE INC: $6,000 · InternationalMADRE INCFINCA INTERNATIONAL INC: $5,540 · InternationalFINCA INTERNATIONAL INCDOCTORS WO BORDERS: $11,500 · OtherDOCTORS WO BORDERSACLU: $10,000 · OtherACLUOXFAM: $4,500 · OtherOXFAMCOUNCIL ON AGING: $4,000 · OtherCOUNCIL ON AGINGIndividual grant recipient: $3,300 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMECA: $1,600 · Other+2 more: $2,000 · Other+2 moreSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $32,750 · Crime & LegalSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER…The Flag Foundation: $3,000 · Human ServicesNEW GEORGIA PROJECT INC: $2,000 · Civil Rights
International$60,740Other$36,900Crime & Legal$32,750Human Services$3,000Civil Rights$2,000

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 budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $32,750 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $20,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INC: $16,200 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetMIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE: $13,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetMADRE INC: $6,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetFINCA INTERNATIONAL INC: $5,540 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetThe Flag Foundation: $3,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetNEW GEORGIA PROJECT INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INC ↗
  • Who funds MIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds MADRE INC ↗
  • Who funds FINCA INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
  • Who funds The Flag Foundation ↗
  • Who funds NEW GEORGIA PROJECT INC ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization William and Maria Iberti Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from William and Maria Iberti Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–5%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to William and Maria Iberti Charitable Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to William and Maria Iberti Charitable Foundation 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 16 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on William and Maria Iberti’s filings →

    More from the funding graph