· Private foundation
Aspiration Impact Foundation
To support charitable organizations that help expand economic opportunity to lower income americans.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2021.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NATIONAL OUTDOOR LEADER | $20,000 |
| LOUSIANA BUCKET BRIGADE | $10,000 |
| GRID ALTERNATIVES | $10,000 |
| ASIAN PACIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK | $10,000 |
| GASP | $10,000 |
| INDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK | $10,000 |
| PLANT CHICAGO | $10,000 |
| GREAT OLD BROADS FOR WILDERNESS | $10,000 |
| HONOR THE EARTH | $10,000 |
| HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT ALLIANCE OF UTAH | $10,000 |
| RAINFOREST FLOW | $10,000 |
| GREEN LATINOS | $10,000 |
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 (FY21–21, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% 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.
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.
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,…
Our mission is to fight against fossil fuel executives and industries that have turned our communities into dumping grounds for toxic waste, poisoning our air, water, lan, and bodies. We organize to oppose giant oil refineries, dirty…
Green 2.0 is a leader ensuring the environmental sector's commitment to advancing effective and inclusive policies and practices to support all communities.
Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.
Rainforest Action Network (RAN) works toward a world where the rights and dignity of all communities are respected and where healthy forests, a stable climate and wild biodiversity are protected and celebrated.
The Corporation is organized exclusively for charitable and educational purposes. Earthworks is dedicated to protecting communities and the environment from the impacts of irresponsible mineral and energy development while seeking…
Taproot Earth works with communities to support strategies around the use of water, energy and land.
Building a diverse grassroots movement to address the causes of climate disruption through justice-based solutions by inspiring, training and mobilizing people to act.
Environmental Law Foundation's (ELF) mission is to protect the environment, communities, and consumers against harmful toxics and other environmental harms. Our work consistently improves environmental quality for those most at risk by…
We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Grid Alternatives and 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.
14 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. 14 of the 15 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 BRIGHT FUNDS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ACCION OPPORTUNITY FUND INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL OUTDOOR LEADERSHIP SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds Gasp ↗
- Who funds HONOR THE EARTH ↗
- Who funds HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT ALLIANCE OF UTAH ↗
- Who funds GREAT OLD BROADS FOR WILDERNESS ↗
- Who funds GRID ALTERNATIVES ↗
- Who funds Plant Chicago NFP ↗
- Who funds LOUISIANA BUCKET BRIGADE ↗
- Who funds RAINFOREST FLOW ↗
- Who funds GreenLatinos ↗
- Who funds Asian Pacific Environmental Network ↗
- Who funds INDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK ↗
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: Tides Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · The Chicago Community Trust · Network for Good · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile 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 Aspiration Impact 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.
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 Aspiration Impact Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Aspiration Impact 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.