· Private foundation
444s 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k14 grants · $414k
- $50k–250k14 grants · $1.3M
- $250k+3 grants · $775k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BIODIVERSITY FUNDERS GROUP | $275,000 |
| MAKEWAY FOUNDATION | $250,000 |
| THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY | $250,000 |
| WINTER WILDLANDS ALLIANCE | $195,000 |
| ALASKA WILDERNESS LEAGUE | $170,000 |
| NATIVE MOVEMENT | $135,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $120,000 |
| THE ALASKA CENTER EDUCATION FUND | $115,000 |
| TRUSTEES FOR ALASKA | $100,000 |
| WEST COAST ENVIRONMENTAL LAW RESEARCH FOUNDATION | $75,000 |
| ECOJUSTICE CANADA SOCIETY | $75,000 |
| ENDANGERED SPECIES COALITION | $75,000 |
| THEODORE ROOSEVELT CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP | $60,000 |
| RESOURCES LEGACY FUND | $51,375 |
| WILDEARTH GUARDIANS | $50,000 |
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.
Your US giving — 69% of grant dollars ($10M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 31% that went abroad ($4.6M) is mapped below.
Your human-services grants (FY19–24, $891k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
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
Beyond the US — 31% of all-years giving ($4.6M)
1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +39% since the first grant, against -29% for the ones you funded once.
43 repeat relationships — 26 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $406k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- TWTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY6× · 2019–2024 · $1.2M · revenue +20%
- WWWINTER WILDLANDS ALLIANCE INC6× · 2019–2024 · $891k · revenue +35% · 26% of their budget
- TATHE ALASKA CENTER EDUCATION FUND6× · 2019–2024 · $735k · revenue +12%
Funded once
- BSBOREAL SONGBIRD INITIATIVEone grant, 2019 · $133k · revenue -100%
- SFSALAL FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $30k
NatureServeone grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue +11%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
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…
Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.
Support ecosystem-based wildlife management by increasing public awareness of wildlife issues, responding to information requests, advocating for science-based wildlife habitat management through proposal and comment submissions, and…
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
The California Wilderness Coalition protects the natural landscapes that make California unique, providing clean air and water, a home to wildlife, and a place for recreation and spiritual renewal.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
Providing legal aid to the environment by providing legal services to conservation organizations, community groups, native american tribes, and individuals working to protect and sustain the pacific northwest's natural legacy.
Promote wildlife habitat
Greater yellowstone coalition works with all people to protect the lands, waters, and wildlife of the greater yellowstone ecosystem, now and for future generations.
Icl's mission is to create a conservation community and pragmatic, enduring solutions that protect and restore the air you breathe, the water you drink, and the land and wildlife you love.
The montana wildlife federation is a statewide conservation organization dedicated to protecting wildlife, wildlife habitat, and public access for outdoor recreation.
The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environment America Research and Policy Center Inc and the most unlike its peers is Oregon State University Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 33 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
35 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. 35 of the 52 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds WINTER WILDLANDS ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds THE ALASKA CENTER EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds The Partnership Project Inc ↗
- Who funds ALASKA WILDERNESS LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES FOR ALASKA ↗
- Who funds ENDANGERED SPECIES COALITION ↗
- Who funds NATIVE MOVEMENT ↗
- Who funds RESOURCES LEGACY FUND ↗
- Who funds WILDEARTH GUARDIANS ↗
- Who funds WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds NORTHERN ALASKA ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION ↗
- Who funds ADVOCATES FOR THE WEST INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS ↗
- Who funds CONSULTATIVE GROUP ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC Biodiversity Funders Grp ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENT AMERICA RESEARCH AND POLICY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds ROUND RIVER CONSERVATION STUDIES ↗
- Who funds NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds BOREAL SONGBIRD INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds WILDERNESS WORKSHOP ↗
- Who funds THEODORE ROOSEVELT CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PACIFIC ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCES CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE GRAND CANYON TRUST INC ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Patagoniaorg · Wilburforce Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · The Pew Charitable Trusts · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · The New-Land Foundation Inc · Tortuga Charitable Foundation · The Wilderness Society · Marin Community Foundation · True North Foundation · Alaska Conservation Foundation · Rasmuson 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 444s 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Oregon State University Foundation — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to 444s Foundation?
Find your warmest path to 444s 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.