Skip to content

· Private foundation

American Conservation Association Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$107k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$25k
Largest
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 2025.

Environment$853kAnimals$75kCommunity Improvement$25kRecreation & Sports$3k
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k9 grants · $42k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $65k
$5,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$60k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL$25,000
CATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER$25,000
OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE$15,000
CLIMATE CENTRAL$5,000
HUDSON RIVER SLOOP CLEARWATER$5,000
PLACEMAKINGX$5,000
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY$5,000
THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY$5,000
CONSERVATION INT'L FOUNDATION$5,000
SCENIC HUDSON INC$5,000
CLIENTEARTH US$5,000
SCENIC AMERICA$2,000
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 86% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%SCENIC HUDSON INC: $5k → 9%CATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER: $25k → 16%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $25k → 17%PLACEMAKINGX: $5k → 20%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $30k → 28%SCENIC AMERICA: $10k → 14%CLIMATE CENTRAL: $5k → 11%THE CONSERVATION FUND: $5k → 7%SCENIC HUDSON INC: $5k → 9%CATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER: $25k → 16%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $25k → 17%PLACEMAKINGX: $5k → 20%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $5k → 28%THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $5k → 14%CLIMATE CENTRAL: $5k → 11%THE CONSERVATION FUND: $5k → 7%SCENIC HUDSON INC: $5k → 9%CATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER: $25k → 16%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $25k → 17%PLACEMAKINGX: $5k → 20%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $5k → 28%THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $5k → 14%THE CONSERVATION FUND: $5k → 7%SCENIC HUDSON INC: $5k → 9%CATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER: $25k → 16%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $25k → 17%PLACEMAKINGX: $5k → 20%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $5k → 28%THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $5k → 14%CATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER: $25k → 16%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $25k → 17%CATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER: $25k → 16%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $25k → 17%CATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER: $25k → 16%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $25k → 17%CATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER: $25k → 16%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $25k → 17%CATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER: $25k → 16%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $25k → 17%OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE: $15k → 17%OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE: $15k → 17%OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE: $15k → 17%OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE: $15k → 17%OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE: $15k → 17%OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE: $15k → 17%OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE: $15k → 17%OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE: $15k → 17%OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE: $15k → 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.
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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$951k · 15 repeat orgs$5k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +59% since the first grant, against +35% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
1

Total granted

$951k
$5k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+59%
+35%

Still filing today

80%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentAnimalsScience & TechOther
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

  • CM
    CATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $225k · revenue +35%
  • NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $225k · revenue +41%
  • OS
    OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $135k · revenue +219%

Funded once

  • DO
    Defenders of Wildlifegraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue +35%
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
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
2
Ocean Conservancy

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

Environment
3
Climate Conservation Dba Center for Large Landscape Conservation

We bring science, policy, and proven solutions directly to communities working to restore the integrity and natural connectivity of the landscapes in which they live. (see schedule o)

Environment
4
New Jersey Conservation Foundation

Recognizing that a healthy environment is critical to the well-being and survival of all living things, new jersey conservation foundation is devoted to preserving land and protecting natural resources throughout new jersey's (continued on…

Environment
5
Environment Now
—
6
Conservation Law Foundation Inc

Conservation law foundation, inc. (clf) protects new england's environment for the benefit of all people and future generations. we use the law, science, and markets to create solutions that preserve and restore our natural resources,…

Environment
7
The International Dark-Sky Association Inc

Darksky international restores the nighttime environment and protects communities from the harmful effects of light pollution through outreach, advocacy, and conservation.

—
8
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
9
Property and Environment Research Center

Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.

Public Benefit
10
Washington Forest Law Center

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.

—
11
National Audubon Society Inc

We work towards a future where birds thrive across the americas because audubon is a powerful, diverse, and ever-growing force for conservation. (continued on schedule o).

Environment
12
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Conservation Fund a Nonprofit Corporation; the most unlike its peers is Wildlife Conservation Society. 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

13 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. 13 of the 16 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)
13/13
Grantees still filing
12/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER INC: $225,000 · EnvironmentCATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER INCNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $225,000 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INCOPEN SPACE INSTITUTE INC: $135,000 · EnvironmentOPEN SPACE INSTITUTE INCScenic Hudson Inc: $45,000 · EnvironmentScenic Hudson IncCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $45,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATIONTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $45,000 · EnvironmentTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY+4 more: $78,000 · Environment+4 moreWildlife Conservation Society: $70,000 · AnimalsDefenders of Wildlife: $5,000 · AnimalsCLIENTEARTH US: $45,000 · OtherPLACEMAKINGX: $25,000 · OtherPARKS AND TRAILS NY: $3,000 · OtherCLIMATE CENTRAL INC: $10,000 · Science & Tech
Environment$798,000Animals$75,000Other$73,000Science & Tech$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER INC: $225,000 over 9y, 2.1% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $225,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetOPEN SPACE INSTITUTE INC: $135,000 over 9y, 0.9% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society: $70,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetScenic Hudson Inc: $45,000 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $45,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $45,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetSCENIC AMERICA: $23,000 over 9y, 1.2% of budgetHUDSON RIVER SLOOP CLEARWATER INC: $20,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetPROJECT FOR PUBLIC SPACES INC: $20,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetTHE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCLIMATE CENTRAL INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetDefenders of Wildlife: $5,000 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.

  • Who funds CATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER INC ↗
  • Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds Wildlife Conservation Society ↗
  • Who funds Scenic Hudson Inc ↗
  • Who funds CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds SCENIC AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds HUDSON RIVER SLOOP CLEARWATER INC ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT FOR PUBLIC SPACES INC ↗
  • Who funds THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds CLIMATE CENTRAL INC ↗
  • Who funds Defenders of Wildlife ↗

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.

Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO6.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 American Conservation Association Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from American Conservation Association Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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 American Conservation Association Inc?

    Find your warmest path to American Conservation Association 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 16 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on American Conservation Association’s filings →

    More from the funding graph