Skip to content
Amazon Watch at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Amazon Watch

To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin.

$1.0M
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$8k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2024.

Environment$793kInternational$27kArts & Culture$20kCivil Rights$8k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $14,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,042,450 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,028,450 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$8,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$3.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AVAAZ FOUNDATION$8,000
SOGOREA TE LAND TRUST$6,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY21–23, $54k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 18% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%GIVEPOWER FOUNDATION: $44k → 10%CHOOSE LOVE COLLECTIVE FUND FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN THE BRAZILIAN AMAZON: $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.

Grants abroad, by region: $627k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region, $473k to organizations and $154k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

South America$627k · 100% · 24 grants · 35 people

Stated purpose: Amazon Defenders · Fire-fighting · Violence prevention

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$707k · 5 repeat orgs$141k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
7

Total granted

$707k
$133k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+5%
+51%

Still filing today

100%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 43% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentInternationalHuman ServicesEducationCivil 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

  • RF
    RAINFOREST FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $265k · revenue +5%
  • TP
    The Pachamama Alliance
    2× · 2020–2021 · $143k · revenue +7%
  • EF
    EARTHWAYS FOUNDATION INC
    3× · 2020–2022 · $105k · revenue +70%

Funded once

  • GF
    GIVEPOWER FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2023 · $44k · revenue +11%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
    one grant, 2017 · $40k
  • HB
    HEALING BRIDGES
    one grant, 2021 · $17k · revenue -13%
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
Amazon Conservation Team

The amazon conservation team (act) partners with indigenous and other local communities to protect tropical forests and strengthen traditional culture.

Science & Tech
2
One Earth Philanthropy

One Earth connects thinkers, doers, activists, and knowledge holders from around the world to solve humanity's greatest ecological challenges--together. Our belief is simple: The solutions to the climate crisis already exist. By connecting…

Environment
3
Environment Now
—
4
Amazon Watch Inc

To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with Indigenous communities in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability, and the preservation of the Amazon Basin's…

Environment
5
Cool Earth Action Usa Inc

Cool earths mission is to back people, protect rainforest, and fighr climate change by supporting indigenops and local communities in maintaining rainforest cover

Environment
6
International Council On Environmental Economics and Development Union
Human Services
7
Natura International Inc

Natura International conserves rainforests and other key natural ecosystems and the endangered species they contain through creation of protected areas in collaboration with local governments and communities in Latin America. In this way…

Public Benefit
8
Global Forest Generation

Global Forest Generation restores and protects forest ecosystems in partnership with grassroots leaders and local communities across vast landscapes which play a critical role in preserving water, protecting biodiversity, storing carbon,…

Environment
9
Health in Harmony

Health in Harmony's mission is to reverse tropical rainforest deforestation for planetary health.

Health
10
International Indigenous Fund for Development and Solidarity Batani
International
11
Natura Bolivia Foundation

The Natura Bolivia Foundation is dedicated to implementing, and evaluating the impact of conservation and development programs, with a focus on watershed conservation, protected areas, and incentive based conservation in Bolivia. We work…

International
12
Rainforest Alliance Inc

RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rainforest Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Indigenous Environmental Network. 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

10 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. 10 of the 13 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RAINFOREST FOUNDATION INC: $265,000 · EnvironmentRAINFOREST FOUNDATION INCSTAND: $164,112 · EnvironmentSTANDThe Pachamama Alliance: $143,000 · EnvironmentThe Pachamama AllianceSOGOREA TE LAND TRUST: $30,000 · EnvironmentEARTHWAYS FOUNDATION INC: $105,000 · InternationalEARTHWAYS FOUNDA…HEALING BRIDGES: $17,228 · InternationalHEALING BRIDGESUNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA: $40,484 · OtherLATIN FLYER: $15,000 · OtherROOTS & ROUTES IC: $5,000 · OtherGIVEPOWER FOUNDATION: $44,462 · Human ServicesCHOOSE LOVE INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesAVAAZ FOUNDATION: $8,000 · Civil RightsINDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK: $1,000 · Education
Environment$602,112International$122,228Other$60,484Human Services$54,462Civil Rights$8,000Education$1,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetRAINFOREST FOUNDATION INC: $265,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetSTAND: $164,112 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetThe Pachamama Alliance: $143,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetEARTHWAYS FOUNDATION INC: $105,000 over 3y, 14% of budgetGIVEPOWER FOUNDATION: $44,462 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSOGOREA TE LAND TRUST: $30,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetHEALING BRIDGES: $17,228 over 1y, 14% of budgetCHOOSE LOVE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAVAAZ FOUNDATION: $8,000 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.

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.

Paypal Charitable Giv…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Paypal Charitable Giving FundDC10.1× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Amazon Watch funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Amazon Watch. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%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 · 0–20%
    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.

    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 13 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $709k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Amazon Watch’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