Skip to content
Alexander Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Alexander Foundation Inc

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.

$7.7M
Granted FY2024still arriving
38
Grants FY2024still arriving
12
States reached
$1.7M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Environment$14MAnimals$3.2MEducation$2.0MPhilanthropy$1.7MRecreation & Sports$1.6MArts & Culture$235kInternational$225kReligion$10kOther$0
02FY2024 · 38 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $155k
  • $50k–250k22 grants · $2.7M
  • $250k+6 grants · $4.8M
$100,000
Median grant
12
States reached
$67M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RENAISSANCE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION$1,700,000
TEACH FOR ALL$1,000,000
MALIASILI INITIATIVES INC$1,000,000
AFRICAN PARKS FOUNDATION$500,000
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY$400,000
WILDLIFE GUARDIANS$250,000
PROPERTY AND ENVIRONMENT RESEARCH CENTER$200,000
THE PEREGRINE FUND$200,000
MONGABAYORG$200,000
ISLAND CONSERVATION$200,000
WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE$200,000
SAHARA CONSERVATION FUND$200,000
TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND$175,000
INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION$150,000
WORLD WILDLIFE FUND$150,000
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 75% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%SAHARA CONSERVATION FUND: $200k → 15%THE PEREGRINE FUND: $200k → 8%PROPERTY AND ENVIRONMENT RESEARCH CENTER: $200k → 10%ISLAND CONSERVATION: $200k → 13%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $950k → 28%IFRE INC: $250k → 14%CONSERVATION STRATEGY FUND: $80k → 14%INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION: $150k → 9%RENAISSANCE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $1.7M → 16%RARE: $275k → 7%CAF AMERICA: $100k → 9%MALIASILI INITIATIVES INC: $1.0M → 10%SAHARA CONSERVATION FUND: $150k → 15%PEREGRINE FUND: $100k → 8%PERC: $140k → 10%ISLAND CONSERVATION: $125k → 13%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $900k → 28%WILDLIFE GUARDIANS: $250k → 14%RARE: $125k → 7%MALIASILI INITIATIVES INC: $600k → 10%PERC: $100k → 10%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $400k → 28%AMERICAN FRIENDS OF BLUE VENTURES INC: $100k → 7%WORLD WILDLIFE FUND: $150k → 17%WILDLIFE GUARDIANS: $200k → 14%LION GUARDIANS: $100k → 14%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $1.6M → 7%LINDEN TRUST FOR CONSERVATION: $1.1M → 17%OCEANA INC: $100k → 14%AMAZON CONSERVATION TEAM: $100k → 7%LINDEN TRUST FOR CONSERVATION: $769k → 17%OCEANA: $100k → 14%LINDEN TRUST FOR CONSERVATION: $625k → 17%LINDEN TRUST FOR CONSERVATION: $500k → 17%CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $100k → 7%LINDEN TRUST FOR CONSERVATION: $400k → 17%LINDEN TRUST FOR CONSERVATION: $100k → 17%WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $600k → 14%AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY: $100k → 17%WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $350k → 14%AFRICAN PARKS FOUNDATION: $1.1M → 17%WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $350k → 14%AFRICAN PARKS FOUNDATION: $500k → 17%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $1.5M → 17%WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $200k → 14%TEACH FOR ALL: $1.0M → 17%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $300k → 17%TEACH FOR ALL: $1.0M → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

VT
WA
ID
MT
WI
NY
IN
CT
CA
VA
AZ
DC
TX
FL
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$19M · 33 repeat orgs$906k to everyone else

33 repeat relationships: 29 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

33
6

Total granted

$19M
$491k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+35%
+115%

Still filing today

76%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $415k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentPhilanthropyAnimalsInternationalScience & TechArts & CultureOther
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

  • WC
    Wildlife Conservation Society
    3× · 2017–2024 · $2.3M · revenue +59%
  • ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED
    3× · 2017–2024 · $1.8M · revenue +202%
  • WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE
    4× · 2017–2024 · $1.5M · revenue +128%

Funded once

  • II
    IFRE INC
    one grant, 2017 · $250k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $100k
  • BU
    BRAC USA INC
    one grant, 2022 · $75k · revenue -50%
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
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
Rainforest Foundation Inc

The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.

Environment
4
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
5
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.

Animals
6
Wildaid Inc

Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.

Animals
7
Ocean Conservancy

Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.

Environment
8
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
9
Conservation Farms & Ranches

Preserving and enhancing the habitat of wildlife, such as sandhill cranes, waterfowl, raptors, which habitat expenses are supported by agricultural activities.

Housing & Shelter
10
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
11
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
12
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mongabay Org Corp; the most unlike its peers is Advocates for Climate Innovation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

37 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 37 of the 50 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
37/37
Grantees still filing
28/37
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,820,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND I…MALIASILI INITIATIVES INC: $1,600,000 · EnvironmentMALIASILI INITIATIVES INCTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND: $525,000 · EnvironmentTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LANDRARE: $400,000 · EnvironmentRAREMONGABAY ORG CORP: $350,000 · EnvironmentMONGABAY ORG CORPISLAND CONSERVATION: $325,000 · EnvironmentISLAND CONSERVATIONOCEANA INC: $275,000 · Environment+7 more: $680,000 · Environment+7 moreADVOCATES FOR CLIMATE INNOVATION: $3,468,974 · PhilanthropyADVOCATES FOR CLIMATE INN…Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc: $1,700,000 · PhilanthropyRenaissance Charitable Fo…+4 more: $158,333 · PhilanthropyTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $1,600,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYAFRICAN PARKS FOUNDATION: $1,600,000 · OtherAFRICAN PARKS FOUNDATIONSAHARA CONSERVATION FUND: $350,000 · OtherSAHARA CONSERVATION FUNDTHE PEREGRINE FUND INC: $300,000 · OtherTHE PEREGRINE FUND INCIFRE INC: $250,000 · OtherPERC: $240,000 · OtherWORLD WILDLIFE FUND: $225,000 · OtherPROPERTY AND ENVIRONMENT RESEARCH CENTER: $200,000 · Other+12 more: $670,000 · Other+12 moreWildlife Conservation Society: $2,250,000 · AnimalsWildlife Conse…WILDLIFE GUARDIANS: $450,000 · AnimalsWILDLIFE GUARD…INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC: $225,000 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL …INTERNATIONAL SNOW LEOPARD TRUST: $210,000 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL …TEACH FOR ALL INC: $2,000,000 · EducationTEACH FOR…WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $1,500,000 · InternationalBRAC USA INC: $75,000 · International+1 more: $50,000 · InternationalAMAZON CONSERVATION TEAM: $225,000 · Science & TechCONSULTATIVE GROUP ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC Biodiversity Funders Grp: $13,000 · Science & Tech
Environment$5,975,000Philanthropy$5,327,307Other$5,435,000Animals$3,135,000Education$2,000,000International$1,625,000Science & Tech$238,000

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 budgetADVOCATES FOR CLIMATE INNOVATION: $3,468,974 over 6y, 66% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society: $2,250,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetTEACH FOR ALL INC: $2,000,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,820,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetRenaissance Charitable Foundation Inc: $1,700,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $1,600,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMALIASILI INITIATIVES INC: $1,600,000 over 2y, 10% of budgetWORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $1,500,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND: $525,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetWILDLIFE GUARDIANS: $450,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetRARE: $400,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetMONGABAY ORG CORP: $350,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetISLAND CONSERVATION: $325,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetTHE PEREGRINE FUND INC: $300,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetOCEANA INC: $275,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetINTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC: $225,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetAMAZON CONSERVATION TEAM: $225,000 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetINTERNATIONAL SNOW LEOPARD TRUST: $210,000 over 3y, 2.9% of budgetPROPERTY AND ENVIRONMENT RESEARCH CENTER: $200,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetAmerican Museum of Natural History: $175,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $175,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF BLUE VENTURES INC: $150,000 over 2y, 4.5% of budgetCONSERVATION STRATEGY FUND: $140,000 over 3y, 2.2% of budgetCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCARY INSTITUTE OF ECOSYSTEM STUDIES INC: $90,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetBRAC USA INC: $75,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSTORM KING ART CENTER: $60,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMYRIAD USA INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetResources for the Future Inc: $50,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetTHE EVERGLADES FOUNDATION INC: $50,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetFAUNA & FLORA INTERNATIONAL USA INC: $50,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetTHE SAND COUNTY FOUNDATION INC: $40,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetFlorida Wildlife Corridor Foundation Inc: $25,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetCONSULTATIVE GROUP ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC Biodiversity Funders Grp: $13,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetGODDARD RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY CENTER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE PHILANTHROPY ROUNDTABLE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Iris Fund Inc: $3,333 over 1y, 2.1% 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.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Carla and David Crane…The Pew Charitable Tr…Gordon E and Betty I …John D and Catherine …Donald J Slavik Famil…The Liz Claiborne & A…Sall Family FoundationConservation Internat…Doris Duke Charitable…National Geographic S…Environmental Defense…Walton Family Foundat…
Carla and David Crane FoundationCA17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 10 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Carla and David Crane Foundation · The Pew Charitable Trusts · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · Donald J Slavik Family Foundation · The Liz Claiborne & Art Ortenberg Foundation · Sall Family Foundation · Conservation International Foundation · Doris Duke Charitable Foundation Inc · National Geographic Society · Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated · Walton Family Foundation Inc

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Alexander Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Alexander Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    4get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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 Alexander Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Alexander Foundation Inc 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 50 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Alexander’s filings →

    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 endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home