Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Private foundation

Beagle Charitable Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$2.6M
Granted FY2024still arriving
25
Grants FY2024still arriving
12
States reached
$620k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.

Environment$7.7MAnimals$2.4MSocial Science$580kPhilanthropy$100kScience & Tech$100kEducation$35k
02FY2024 · 25 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $1
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $210k
  • $50k–250k15 grants · $1.3M
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.1M
$50,000
Median grant
12
States reached
$50M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL$620,000
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK$475,000
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$235,000
ONEREEF WORLDWIDE STEWARDSHIP$125,000
EARTH ISLAND INSTITUTE$124,000
HARVARD LAW SCHOOL$120,000
YELLOWSTONE FOREVER$100,000
WESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY$100,000
MAINE COAST HERITAGE TRUST$75,000
OCEANA$75,000
THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND$50,000
WORKING DOGS FOR CONSERVATION$50,000
SOUTHERN UTAH WILDERNESS ALLIANCE$50,000
THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA$50,000
SAN JUAN PRESERVATION TRUST$50,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 86% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: $120k → 8%YELLOWSTONE FOREVER: $151k → 10%EARTH ISLAND INSTITUTE: $124k → 10%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK: $475k → 10%ONEREEF WORLDWIDE STEWARDSHIP: $150k → 13%OCEANA: $100k → 14%WESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY: $100k → 12%SOUTHERN UTAH WILDERNESS ALLIANCE: $50k → 8%SAN JUAN PRESERVATION TRUST: $75k → 10%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $620k → 12%MAINE COAST HERITAGE TRUST: $100k → 9%HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: $120k → 8%YELLOWSTONE FOREVER: $100k → 10%EARTH ISLAND INSTITUTE: $100k → 10%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK: $475k → 10%ONEREEF WORLDWIDE STEWARDSHIP: $150k → 13%OCEANA: $100k → 14%WESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY: $100k → 12%SOUTHERN UTAH WILDERNESS ALLIANCE: $50k → 8%SAN JUAN PRESERVATION TRUST: $50k → 10%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $620k → 12%MAINE COAST HERITAGE TRUST: $75k → 9%HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: $120k → 8%YELLOWSTONE FOREVER: $100k → 10%EARTH ISLAND INSTITUTE: $100k → 10%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK: $400k → 10%ONEREEF WORLDWIDE STEWARDSHIP: $150k → 13%OCEANA: $100k → 14%SOUTHERN UTAH WILDERNESS ALLIANCE: $50k → 8%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $600k → 12%MAINE COAST HERITAGE TRUST: $75k → 9%HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: $120k → 8%EARTH ISLAND INSTITUTE: $100k → 10%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK: $400k → 10%ONEREEF WORLDWIDE STEWARDSHIP: $125k → 13%OCEANA: $100k → 14%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $500k → 12%MAINE COAST HERITAGE TRUST: $75k → 9%HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: $100k → 8%EARTH ISLAND INSTITUTE: $100k → 10%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK: $300k → 10%ONEREEF WORLDWIDE STEWARDSHIP: $100k → 13%OCEANA: $75k → 14%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $500k → 12%MAINE COAST HERITAGE TRUST: $75k → 9%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $235k → 10%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $215k → 10%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $180k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

ME
WA
MT
MA
OR
CA
UT
MD
DE
AZ
TN
DC
AL

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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 14% of Beagle Charitable Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 40% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 43% — more of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Beagle Charitable Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 8.9% directed abroad (not shown)

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge
repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$9.9M · 21 repeat orgs$260k to everyone else

21 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
1

Total granted

$9.9M
$50k

Still filing today

76%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $210k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentAnimalsEducationRecreation & SportsOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

  • NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $2.8M · revenue +26%
  • WC
    WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $2.0M · revenue +167%
  • OW
    OneReef Worldwide Stewardship
    5× · 2020–2024 · $675k · revenue +199%

Funded once

  • WR
    WESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY
    one grant, 2022 · $50k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
2
Sustainable Conservation

Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…

Environment
3
CalWild

The California Wilderness Coalition protects the natural landscapes that make California unique, providing clean air and water, a home to wildlife, and a place for recreation and spiritual renewal.

—
4
Cascadia Wildlands

Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…

Environment
5
Land Conservancy of West Michigan

Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…

Environment
6
Wildcoast

The mission of wildcoast is to conserve coastal and marine ecosystems and address climate change through natural solutions. our staff is dedicated to conserving threatened and endangered coastlines and wildlife in california and mexico.…

Environment
7
Conservation Farms & Ranches

Preserving and enhancing the habitat of wildlife, such as sandhill cranes, waterfowl, raptors, which habitat expenses are supported by agricultural activities.

Housing & Shelter
8
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
9
Int'l Union for Conservation of Nature & Natural Resources - Us

Iucn-us fund builds bridges between us donors and iucn by catalyzing, accelerating, funding and promoting iucn's work - conserving nature and natural resources in the united states and throughout the world.

Environment
10
Idaho Conservation League Inc

Icl's mission is to create a conservation community and pragmatic, enduring solutions that protect and restore the air you breathe, the water you drink, and the land and wildlife you love.

—
11
Tuolumne River Preservation Trust dba Yosemite Rivers Alliance

At Yosemite Rivers Alliance, we unite conservation and community to protect and restore the three rivers that ?ow through the Yosemite Regionthe Tuolumne, Stanislaus, and Merced.

—
12
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

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wildlife Conservation Network Inc and the most unlike its peers is National Geographic Society. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 42 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%0%<5yr14%0%5–10yr19%10%10–20yr16%35%20–35yr13%35%35–55yr16%20%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%0%<5yr14%0%5–10yr19%8%10–20yr16%31%20–35yr13%17%35–55yr16%44%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/24
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,541

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

05the grantee network

24 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. 24 of the 30 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
24/24
Grantees still filing
17/24
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC — $2,840,000 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INCEarth Island Institute Inc — $524,000 · EnvironmentEarth Island Institute IncOCEANA INC — $475,000 · EnvironmentOCEANA INCYELLOWSTONE FOREVER — $426,000 · EnvironmentYELLOWSTONE FOREVERMaine Coast Heritage Trust — $400,000 · EnvironmentMaine Coast Heritage TrustTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND — $350,000 · EnvironmentTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LANDSouthern Utah Wilderness Alliance — $250,000 · EnvironmentTHE SAN JUAN PRESERVATION TRUST — $225,000 · Environment+7 more — $560,000 · Environment+7 moreWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC — $2,050,000 · AnimalsWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWOR…OneReef Worldwide Stewardship — $675,000 · AnimalsOneReef Worldwide Stewardshi…THE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $730,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVA…HARVARD LAW SCHOOL — $580,000 · OtherHARVARD LAW SCHOOLWORKING DOGS FOR CONSERVATION — $250,000 · OtherWORKING DOGS FOR CO…THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA — $100,000 · OtherUTAH'S HOGLE ZOO — $100,000 · OtherMETHOW VALLEY CITIZENS COUNCIL — $75,000 · Other+3 more — $75,020 · OtherNATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY — $100,000 · EducationARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION FOR A NEW AMERICAN UNIVERSITY — $35,000 · EducationPARK CITY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $100,000 · PhilanthropyTENNGREEN LAND CONSERVANCY — $25,000 · Recreation & Sports
Environment$6,050,000Animals$2,725,000Other$1,910,020Education$135,000Philanthropy$100,000Recreation & Sports$25,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC — $2,840,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC — $2,050,000 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $730,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetOneReef Worldwide Stewardship — $675,000 over 5y, 16% of budgetEarth Island Institute Inc — $524,000 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetOCEANA INC — $475,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetYELLOWSTONE FOREVER — $426,000 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetMaine Coast Heritage Trust — $400,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND — $350,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetSouthern Utah Wilderness Alliance — $250,000 over 5y, 1.1% of budgetTHE SAN JUAN PRESERVATION TRUST — $225,000 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetWESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY — $200,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetGREATER YELLOWSTONE COALITION — $150,000 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetNATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY — $100,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPARK CITY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $100,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetMETHOW VALLEY CITIZENS COUNCIL — $75,000 over 3y, 18% of budgetADVENTURERS AND SCIENTISTS FOR CONSERVATION — $50,000 over 2y, 3.3% of budgetYELLOWSTONE TO YUKON — $50,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetHARPETH CONSERVANCY — $40,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetAlabama Rivers Alliance Inc — $40,000 over 1y, 6.4% of budgetARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION FOR A NEW AMERICAN UNIVERSITY — $35,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTENNESSEE ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL — $30,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetTENNGREEN LAND CONSERVANCY — $25,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetAlabama Forest Land Trust Inc — $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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.

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.

PatagoniaorgVanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
PatagoniaorgCA19.4× affinity7 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Patagoniaorg · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Beagle Charitable 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Western Rivers Conservancy — 0% of 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
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Beagle Charitable Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Beagle Charitable 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 30 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines