Skip to content
Aspiration Impact Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Aspiration Impact Foundation

To support charitable organizations that help expand economic opportunity to lower income americans.

$131k
Granted FY2021
12
Grants FY2021
9
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2021.

Environment$115kPhilanthropy$49kCommunity Improvement$33kFood & Nutrition$10kInternational$10k
02FY2021 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$10,000
Median grant
9
States reached
$4k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATIONAL OUTDOOR LEADER$20,000
ASIAN PACIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK$10,000
GASP$10,000
GREEN LATINOS$10,000
RAINFOREST FLOW$10,000
LOUSIANA BUCKET BRIGADE$10,000
HONOR THE EARTH$10,000
HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT ALLIANCE OF UTAH$10,000
GRID ALTERNATIVES$10,000
INDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK$10,000
PLANT CHICAGO$10,000
GREAT OLD BROADS FOR WILDERNESS$10,000
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 (FY21–21, $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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%GREAT OLD BROADS FOR WILDERNESS: $10k → 12%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

MN
IL
NY
WY
CA
UT
CO
DC
LA
AL
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 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
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
2
Environment Now
—
3
California Environmental Justice Alliance

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…

Environment
4
Green 20

Green 2.0 is a leader ensuring the environmental sector's commitment to advancing effective and inclusive policies and practices to support all communities.

Environment
5
Fresh Energy

Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.

Environment
6
Rainforest Action Network

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.

Environment
7
Earthworks

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…

Public Benefit
8
Taproot Earth

Taproot Earth works with communities to support strategies around the use of water, energy and land.

Environment
9
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
10
350PDX

Building a diverse grassroots movement to address the causes of climate disruption through justice-based solutions by inspiring, training and mobilizing people to act.

Environment
11
Environmental Law Foundation

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…

Crime & Legal
12
Natural Resources Defense Council Inc

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…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Grid Alternatives; 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

14 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. 14 of the 15 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
7/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NATIONAL OUTDOOR LEADERSHIP SCHOOL: $20,000 · EnvironmentNATIONAL OUTDOOR LEADERSHIP SCHOOLGasp: $10,000 · EnvironmentGaspHONOR THE EARTH: $10,000 · EnvironmentHONOR THE EARTHGRID ALTERNATIVES: $10,000 · EnvironmentGRID ALTERNATIVESHEALTHY ENVIRONMENT ALLIANCE OF UTAH: $10,000 · EnvironmentHEALTHY ENVIRONMENT ALLIANCE OF UTAHLOUISIANA BUCKET BRIGADE: $10,000 · EnvironmentLOUISIANA BUCKET BRIGADEAsian Pacific Environmental Network: $10,000 · EnvironmentAsian Pacific Environmental NetworkGreenLatinos: $10,000 · EnvironmentGreenLatinosBRIGHT FUNDS FOUNDATION: $49,102 · PhilanthropyBRIGHT FUNDS FOUNDATIONACCION OPPORTUNITY FUND INC: $33,372 · Community ImprovementACCION OPPORTUNIT…GREAT OLD BROADS FOR WILDERNESS: $10,000 · Human ServicesRAINFOREST FLOW: $10,000 · InternationalINDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK: $10,000 · EducationPlant Chicago NFP: $10,000 · Food & Nutrition350 NEW ORLEANS INC: $5,000 · Other
Environment$90,000Philanthropy$49,102Community Improvement$33,372Human Services$10,000International$10,000Education$10,000Food & Nutrition$10,000Other$5,000

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 budgetBRIGHT FUNDS FOUNDATION: $49,102 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetACCION OPPORTUNITY FUND INC: $33,372 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetNATIONAL OUTDOOR LEADERSHIP SCHOOL: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGasp: $10,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetHONOR THE EARTH: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGREAT OLD BROADS FOR WILDERNESS: $10,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetRAINFOREST FLOW: $10,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetGRID ALTERNATIVES: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHEALTHY ENVIRONMENT ALLIANCE OF UTAH: $10,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetINDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetLOUISIANA BUCKET BRIGADE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetAsian Pacific Environmental Network: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGreenLatinos: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetPlant Chicago NFP: $10,000 over 1y, 2.4% 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.

Tides FoundationPatagoniaorgNatural Resources Def…Silicon Valley Commun…Rockefeller Philanthr…The Chicago Community…Network for GoodVanguard Charitable E…Fidelity Investments …American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Tides FoundationCA15.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 Aspiration Impact Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Aspiration Impact Foundation. 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    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.

    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 15 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2023) is on record but names no grant recipient (grants abroad are filed by region only, and grants under $5,000 are not itemized), so the figures above are from FY2021, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Aspiration Impact’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