Skip to content

· Public charity

Catalyst4 Inc

To foster, support, promote and conduct activities designed to benefit and improve the environment and global health.

$84M
Granted FY2023
7
Grants FY2023
3
States reached
$50M
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

64% of Catalyst4 Inc’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Sixteen Thirty Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 7 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2023, the last year Catalyst4 Inc named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $84M. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

1
’22
6
’23
7
’24

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

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$85MHealth$50MScience & Tech$4.8MInternational$25k
02FY2023 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$3,029,854
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.1B
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH$50,000,000
ENERGY ACTION FUND$24,000,000
SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND$4,000,000
FUND FOR A BETTER FUTURE$3,029,854
SPARK NS INC$1,700,000
TIDES ADVOCACY$800,000
PARTNERSHIP PROJECT ACTION FUND$500,000
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 (FY22–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 69% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $25.0M → 10%SPARK NS INC: $1.7M → 7%WASTEWATER ACTION ALLIANCE INC: $25k → 8%TIDES ADVOCACY: $800k → 10%FUND FOR A BETTER FUTURE: $3.0M → 12%SPARK NS INC: $3.1M → 14%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE ACTION FUND: $400k → 17%GREENLIGHT ACTION: $1.2M → 14%ENERGY ACTION FUND: $6.6M → 10%FUND FOR A BETTER FUTURE INC: $550k → 12%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $3.5M → 14%ENERGY ACTION FUND: $24.0M → 10%SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $7.0M → 14%ENERGY ACTION FUND: $5.7M → 10%SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $4.0M → 14%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.

44%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$45M · 3 repeat orgs$56M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +103% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2023, 0 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call). Read against FY2023, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
7

Total granted

$45M
$56M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+103%
0%

Still filing today

100%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5.2M went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24
EnvironmentHealthScience & TechCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • EA
    ENERGY ACTION FUND
    3× · 2022–2024 · $36M · revenue +103% · 50% of their budget
  • SN
    SPARK NS INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $4.8M · 99% of their budget
  • FF
    FUND FOR A BETTER FUTURE INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $3.6M · revenue -82%

Funded once

  • THE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCHgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $50M · revenue +124%
  • LO
    LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC
    one grant, 2024 · $3.5M
  • GA
    GREENLIGHT ACTION
    one grant, 2024 · $1.2M · 59% of their budget
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
Partnership for Policy Integrity

Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.

Environment
2
United States Energy Foundation

The united states energy foundation's mission is to secure a clean and equitable energy future to tackle the climate crisis.

Philanthropy
3
Nrdc Action Fund Inc

To build political support for advancing the goals of the natural resources defense council.

—
4
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
5
Legal Advocates for Safe Science and Technology Inc

Using legal advocacy to make advances in science and technology safer for people and the planet.

Science & Tech
6
Floodlight Inc

Floodlight is an environmental news organization that investigates the people and corporations stalling climate action. We collaborate with local and nonprofit publications.

Arts & Culture
7
Climate Foundation

To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.

Science & Tech
8
Breakthrough Energy Foundation

Working with our world-class network of innovators, business and industry leaders, and policy experts, we accelerate the innovation of climate technologies at every stage - from discovery to development to deployment.

Public Benefit
9
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
10
Breakthrough Energy Action Inc

The world's economic and energy policies are built around technologies that emit greenhouse gases. That must change. We develop and advocate for smart policies that public and private sector leaders can implement to support clean energy…

Environment
11
Greenlight America

Our vision for the future abundant clean energy dramatically lowers u.s. greenhouse gas emissions, mitigating the pace of climate change and stopping the severe and inequitable health continued on sch o

Environment
12
Frack Action Fund Inc

Research and inform the public about the hazards of high-volume hydraulic fracturing and other gas and oil extraction processes, other energy industry practices, environmental sustainability, and renewable energy.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Energy Action Fund; the most unlike its peers is Spark Ns Inc. 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

10 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. 10 of the 12 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ENERGY ACTION FUND: $36,300,000 · EnvironmentENERGY ACTION FUNDSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $36,000,000 · EnvironmentSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND+3 more: $2,100,000 · EnvironmentTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH: $50,000,000 · HealthTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINS…SPARK NS INC: $4,850,000 · Science & TechLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $3,545,000 · OtherTIDES ADVOCACY: $800,000 · Other+1 more: $25,000 · OtherFUND FOR A BETTER FUTURE INC: $3,579,854 · Community ImprovementHUMBOLDT AREA FOUNDATION: $2,555,060 · Philanthropy
Environment$74,400,000Health$50,000,000Science & Tech$4,850,000Other$4,370,000Community Improvement$3,579,854Philanthropy$2,555,060

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 budgetTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH: $50,000,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetENERGY ACTION FUND: $36,300,000 over 3y, 50% of budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $36,000,000 over 3y, 8.9% of budgetSPARK NS INC: $4,850,000 over 2y, 99% of budgetFUND FOR A BETTER FUTURE INC: $3,579,854 over 2y, 7.3% of budgetHUMBOLDT AREA FOUNDATION: $2,555,060 over 1y, 11% of budgetGREENLIGHT ACTION: $1,200,000 over 1y, 59% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY: $800,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetThe Partnership Project Action Fund: $500,000 over 1y, 7.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE ACTION FUND: $400,000 over 1y, 1.2% 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 Heising-Simons Action FundCA15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Heising-Simons Action Fund · NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc · Fund for a Better Future Inc · Advocacy Action Fund Inc · League of Conservation Voters Inc · Sixteen Thirty Fund

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 Catalyst4 Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Catalyst4 Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 Catalyst4 Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Catalyst4 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 12 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Catalyst4’s filings →

    More from the funding graph