Skip to content
Atira Conservation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Atira Conservation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$405k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
9
States reached
$80k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through 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, FY2022 to 2024.

Environment$642kAnimals$41k
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $245k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $155k
$30,000
Median grant
9
States reached
$6.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Trust for Public Land - Mid South Chapter$80,000
Gallatin Land Trust$75,000
KY Natural Lands Trust$40,000
Alachua Conservation Trust Inc$40,000
Wood River Land Trust$40,000
NE Wilderness Trust$30,000
Highlands - Cashiers Land Trust$30,000
Vital Ground Foundation$20,000
Mainspring Conservation Trust$17,801
Oregon Desert Land Trusts$17,142
The North American Land Trust$10,000
Mississippi Valley Conservancy$5,545
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 (FY22–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 53% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%AFRICAN AQUATIC CONSERVATION FUND: $2k → 8%Wood River Land Trust: $40k → 7%Montana Land Reliance: $14k → 9%Vital Ground Foundation: $20k → 9%Gallatin Land Trust: $75k → 10%The North American Land Trust: $10k → 6%Land Paths: $23k → 9%DOG ISLAND CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $30k → 18%Trust for Public Land - Mid South Chapter: $80k → 19%Alachua Conservation Trust Inc: $40k → 19%Mississippi Valley Conservancy: $6k → 12%Oregon Desert Land Trusts: $17k → 12%TennGreen Land Conservancy: $8k → 14%Mainspring Conservation Trust: $18k → 12%Summit Land Conservancy: $30k → 5%CENTRAL INDIANA LAND TRUST: $13k → 16%CARDINAL LAND CONSERVANCY: $40k → 9%Western Reserve land Conservancy: $55k → 17%MISSISSIPPI LAND TRUST: $25k → 27%NE Wilderness Trust: $33k → 9%WOODS & WATERS LAND TRUST: $6k → 14%KY Natural Lands Trust: $50k → 16%AFRICAN AQUATIC CONSERVATION FUND: $2k → 8%Wood River Land Trust: $20k → 7%Vital Ground Foundation: $19k → 9%Trust for Public Lands: $37k → 19%Highlands - Cashiers Land Trust: $30k → 12%WESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY: $35k → 17%NE Wilderness Trust: $30k → 9%KY Natural Lands Trust: $40k → 16%African Aquatic Conservation Fund: $2k → 8%VITAL GROUND FOUNDATION: $17k → 9%KENTUCKY NATURAL LANDS TRUST: $30k → 16%Five Valleys Land Trust: $70k → 9%FIVE VALLEYS LAND TRUST: $15k → 9%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

VT
ID
MT
MA
IN
OH
CA
UT
KY
NM
TN
MS
FL
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.

41%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$449k · 7 repeat orgs$640k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
13

Total granted

$449k
$364k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+35%
+104%

Still filing today

86%
85%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 32% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $275k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentRecreation & SportsFood & NutritionAnimalsOther
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

  • WR
    WESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY
    2× · 2023–2024 · $90k · revenue +67%
  • NORTHEAST WILDERNESS TRUST CORPORATION
    2× · 2024–2025 · $63k · revenue +42%
  • WR
    WOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO
    2× · 2024–2025 · $60k · revenue +35%

Funded once

  • NM
    NEW MEXICO LAND CONSERVANCYgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $83k · revenue +168%
  • CL
    CARDINAL LAND CONSERVANCYgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $40k · revenue ×11
  • TF
    Trust for Public Lands
    one grant, 2024 · $37k
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
New River Land Trust

To conserve the rural, natural, and cultural heritage of the new river region, protecting farms, forests, open spaces, and historic places.

Environment
2
Lakes Region Conservation Trust

The mission of the Organization is the conservation of the natural resources of the Lakes Region of New Hampshire, the preservation of wildlife habitat, the stewardship of lands that define the character of the region and its quality of…

Environment
3
Teton Regional Land Trust Inc

The mission of the teton regional land trust is to conserve working farms and ranches, fish and wildlife habitat, and scenic open spaces in eastern idaho for this and future generations.

Environment
4
Palouse Land Trust Inc

Our mission is to work with landowners and communities to conserve the lands we love, now and forever, and to enrich connections to the natural world.

Environment
5
Placer Land Trust

Placer Land Trust works with willing landowners and conservation partners to permanently protect and care for natural and agricultural lands in Placer County for current and future generations.

Environment
6
Whatcom Land Trust

The mission of the Whatcom Land Trust is to preserve and protect wildlife habitat, scenic, agricultural and open space lands in Whatcom County for future generations by securing interests in land and promoting land stewardship.

Environment
7
Montgomery County Lands Trust Inc

Land Conservation and Preservation.

Environment
8
Shasta Land Trust

Conserve the beauty, character, and diversity of significant lands in far northern california. currently shasta land trust holds conservation easements that permanently protect about 66,000 acres of land.

Environment
9
Colorado Open Lands

Colorado open lands' mission is to preserve the significant open lands and natural heritage of colorado through private and public partnerships, innovative land conservation, and strategic leadership.

Environment
10
Triangle Land Conservancy Inc

Triangle land conservancy (tlc) strives to create a healthier and more vibrant triangle region by safeguarding clean water, protecting natural habitats, supporting local farms, and connecting people with nature through land protection and…

Environment
11
Northcoast Regional Land Trust

Northcoast regional land trust is dedicated to the protection of working landscapes, farms, forests and grazing lands, and to the preservation and protection of land for its natural, educational, scenic and historic values.

Food & Nutrition
12
Heartlands Conservancy

The mission of heartlands conservancy is to empower and colaborate with the people of southern illinois to advance and protect the health of our distinctive communities and nationally significant natural and cultural resources.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mississippi Valley Conservancy Inc; the most unlike its peers is LandPaths. 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

22 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. 22 of the 28 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/22
Grantees still filing
14/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY: $90,000 · EnvironmentWESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCYFIVE VALLEYS LAND TRUST: $85,000 · EnvironmentFIVE VALLEYS LAND TRUSTNORTHEAST WILDERNESS TRUST CORPORATION: $63,000 · EnvironmentNORTHEAST WILDERNESS TRUST CORPORATIONWOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO: $60,000 · EnvironmentWOOD RIVER LAND TRUST COALACHUA CONSERVATION TRUST INC: $40,000 · EnvironmentALACHUA CONSERVATION TRUST INCCARDINAL LAND CONSERVANCY: $40,000 · EnvironmentCARDINAL LAND CONSERVANCYKENTUCKY NATURAL LANDS TRUST INC: $30,000 · EnvironmentHighlands-Cashiers Land Trust Inc: $30,000 · EnvironmentSummit Land Conservancy: $30,000 · EnvironmentSYCAMORE LAND TRUST INCORPORATED: $25,000 · EnvironmentMISSISSIPPI LAND TRUST: $24,500 · EnvironmentLandPaths: $23,358 · Environment+6 more: $66,346 · Environment+6 moreKY Natural Lands Trust: $90,000 · OtherKY Natural Lands TrustTrust for Public Land - Mid South Chapter: $80,000 · OtherTrust for Public Land - Mid South Chapt…Gallatin Land Trust: $75,000 · OtherGallatin Land TrustTHE VITAL GROUND FOUNDATION INC: $55,050 · OtherTHE VITAL GROUND FOUNDATION INCTrust for Public Lands: $37,000 · OtherTrust for Public LandsDOG ISLAND CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $30,000 · OtherDOG ISLAND CONSERVATION DISTRICTOregon Desert Land Trusts: $17,142 · OtherNEW MEXICO LAND CONSERVANCY: $83,000 · Food & NutritionTENNGREEN LAND CONSERVANCY: $8,200 · Recreation & SportsAFRICAN AQUATIC CONSERVATION FUND INC: $6,000 · Animals
Environment$607,204Other$384,192Food & Nutrition$83,000Recreation & Sports$8,200Animals$6,000

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 budgetWESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY: $90,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetFIVE VALLEYS LAND TRUST: $85,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetNEW MEXICO LAND CONSERVANCY: $83,000 over 1y, 5.2% of budgetNORTHEAST WILDERNESS TRUST CORPORATION: $63,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetWOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO: $60,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetTHE VITAL GROUND FOUNDATION INC: $55,050 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetCARDINAL LAND CONSERVANCY: $40,000 over 1y, 7.4% of budgetKENTUCKY NATURAL LANDS TRUST INC: $30,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetSummit Land Conservancy: $30,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSYCAMORE LAND TRUST INCORPORATED: $25,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetMISSISSIPPI LAND TRUST: $24,500 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetLandPaths: $23,358 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetTHE MONTANA LAND RELIANCE: $14,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCENTRAL INDIANA LAND TRUST INCORPORATED: $13,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTENNGREEN LAND CONSERVANCY: $8,200 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetAFRICAN AQUATIC CONSERVATION FUND INC: $6,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetWOODS AND WATERS LAND TRUST INC: $6,000 over 1y, 7.2% of budgetMISSISSIPPI VALLEY CONSERVANCY INC: $5,545 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

The Nature ConservancyLand Trust Alliance I…National Fish and Wil…PatagoniaorgAmerican Endowment Fo…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Raymond James Charita…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…Morgan Stanley Global…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…
The Nature ConservancyVA21.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Nature Conservancy · Land Trust Alliance Inc · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Patagoniaorg · American Endowment Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 55%
  • African Aquatic Conservation Fund Inc: 55% of income from government
  • Northeast Wilderness Trust Corporation: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Atira Conservation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Atira Conservation 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 28 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 Atira Conservation’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