Loading…
Loading…
Washington, D.C. · Nonprofit
FWDUS INC (Washington, D.C.) is funded by 9 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $214,120,875 in grants to it, the largest being Chan Zuckerberg Advocacy ($199,910,075). 3 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
FWDUS INC is better cushioned than half of the 140 civil rights nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 140 civil rights nonprofits $10M–$100M, FY2024
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
The funding model — what share of revenue comes from contributions, programs, investments and other sources — and whether it's shifting.
96% of FWDUS INC’s revenue is contributions — about as donation-reliant as the typical peer (96% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 3 of the last 7 reported years ran a deficit.
$8.1M from 4 funders in 2024, up from $24M and 1 in 2017.
From the IRS filings of FWDUS INC’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
FWDUS INC leans on a few funders — its largest provides 93% of grant income and the top three 99%; half comes from just 1 funder.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 1 funder to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2017 100% · 2018 100% · 2019 100% · 2020 90% · 2021 100% · 2022 90% · 2023 87% · 2024 61% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
20% of FWDUS INC's funders are still giving 3 years after their first grant; 33% give in more than one year at all.
Share of funders still giving k years after their first recorded grant, pooled across every acquisition cohort. A funder counts as retained in a year only if it made a grant that year.
FWDUS INC draws 99% of its grant income from funders outside Washington, D.C. — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 6 states in all.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first. Your 9 funders put you under-funded among the 400 organizations that share them.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
75% of spending goes to programs.
Operates in 2 states
Part of a family of 10 related entities
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2018–2024), and the filings of 9funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. view filing