· Public charity
Alliance for Green Heat
The Alliance for Green Heat promotes modern wood and pellet heating systems as a low-carbon sustainable and affordable energy solution.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2023–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k5 grants · $31k
- $10k–50k34 grants · $959k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $150k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Wood4Good LTD | $50,000 |
| Shoshone Paiute Tribe | $50,000 |
| Little Woodbank | $50,000 |
| Chama Peak Land Alliance | $49,958 |
| Nez Perce Tribe | $49,900 |
| Oglala Sioux Tribe | $49,541 |
| Dine Baadeiti For the People | $46,675 |
| CommunityWorx | $45,993 |
| Hinton Rural Life Center | $45,758 |
| Crow Tribe | $45,436 |
| Kayenta Chapter | $42,111 |
| Full Circle Forestry Collective | $37,639 |
| Yee Ha olnii Doo | $35,326 |
| Nativity Woodbank | $33,699 |
| Warm Hearths Firewood Bank | $30,000 |
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 human-services grants (FY23–25, $114k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 91% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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
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.
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.
21 repeat relationships — 14 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 28 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 39% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $696k 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
- DBDINE BAADEITI - FOR THE PEOPLE3× · 2023–2025 · $76k
- CPCHAMA PEAK LAND ALLIANCE2× · 2024–2025 · $65k · revenue 0%
- CCOMMUNITYWORX2× · 2024–2025 · $61k · revenue +26% · 38% of their budget
Funded once
- CLConservation Legacyone grant, 2023 · $34k
- NLNATIVITY LUTHERAN CHURCHone grant, 2024 · $30k
- RORural Organizing and Resilienceone grant, 2024 · $29k
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.
providing firewood to heat homes for those who are in need
To restore enhance and maintain our native forest ecosystems
Womanshare Legacy is an educational, financial and cultural resource for women who may be facing challenges because of discrimination, lack of opportunities or scarcity of personal support. Womanshare Legacy works locally with women,…
The Northern Forest Center creates bold possibilities that give rise to vibrant Northern Forest communities and envisions a thriving and welcoming Northern Forest region sustained by innovation and environmental stewardship.
The mission of The Blackfoot Challenge is to coordinate efforts that will conserve and enhance the natural resources and rural way of life in the Blackfoot Watershed for present and future generations.
To bring together the resources of public and private resource organizations in the interests of wildfire prevention loss and mitigation.
To engage the community and facilitate efforts that will enhance, sustain, conserve and protect the natural resources and rural lifestyle of the Clearwater Watershed for present and future generations.
Vision: a healthy and resilient big thompson watershed benefitting fish, wildlife, and the people itserves through collaborative efforts for current and future generations. mission: working with others to take action that protects and…
EcoSource Native Seed & Restoration works with and for its members to provide business opportunities aimed at collecting, cleaning, producing, and storing genetically-appropriate native plant seeds. We also develop and implement the most…
The Boulder Watershed Collective is a 501c3 non-profit stakeholder-driven organization established to address forested watershed health,resiliency and stewardship. We have three program areas: ClimateAdaptation and Resilience Watershed…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Downeast Lakes Land Trust and the most unlike its peers is Swan Valley Connections. 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.
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 12 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 32% of your grantees by number, and just 43% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% 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.
34 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. 34 of the 129 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 CHAMA PEAK LAND ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITYWORX ↗
- Who funds WOOD4GOOD LTD ↗
- Who funds YEE HAOLNII DOO ↗
- Who funds MAINE WOOD BANKS ↗
- Who funds Black Mesa Trust inc ↗
- Who funds BEAVERHEAD COMMUNITY WOOD BANK MINISTRY INC ↗
- Who funds UTAH NAVAJO HEALTH SYSTEM INC ↗
- Who funds CHIP INC ↗
- Who funds Gold Country Community Services ↗
- Who funds ASHEVILLE TOOL LIBRARY ↗
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: First Nations Development Institute · National Forest Foundation · Ndn Collective Inc · National Indian Health Board · The Nature Conservancy · New Mexico Community Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The Hopi Foundation Lomasumi'Nangwtukwsiwmani · Grid Alternatives · The Wilderness Society · Maine Community Foundation Inc · AARP
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 Alliance for Green Heat 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.
- Integral Youth Services — 29% of income from government
- Greenagers Inc — 7% 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 Alliance for Green Heat?
Find your warmest path to Alliance for Green Heat 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.