Skip to content
Center for Carbon Removal at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Center for Carbon Removal

Carbon180's mission is to design and champion equitable, science-based policies that bring carbon removal solutions to gigatone scale.

$908k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Environment$3.4MPublic Benefit$350kHealth$10k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $25k
  • $50k–250k7 grants · $880k
$100,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$18M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNTIL JUSTICE$150,000
THE INSTITUTE FOR ENHANCED EQUITY$150,000
RESTORE THE DELTA$150,000
AMERICAN UNIVERSITY$130,000
AINA MOMONA$100,000
INSTITUTE FOR SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH$100,000
SOUND FISHERIES INC$100,000
SEEC INSTITUTE$15,000
SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY AND LAND RETENTION NETWORK INC$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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 58% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%BLUEGREEN ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $200k → 11%One Montana: $10k → 10%DATA FOR THE SOCIAL GOOD EDUCATION FUND: $200k → 9%MULTIPLIER: $1.2M → 10%RESTORE THE DELTA: $150k → 12%AINA MOMONA: $100k → 9%AIR ALLIANCE HOUSTON: $200k → 16%SEEC INSTITUTE: $15k → 14%BLACK MILLENIALS 4 FLINT: $200k → 17%APPALACHAIN VOICES: $200k → 21%SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY AND LAND RETENTION NETWORK INC: $10k → 11%SOUND FISHERIES INC: $100k → 7%UNTIL JUSTICE: $150k → 15%BLUEGREEN ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $220k → 11%CarbonPlan: $100k → 10%RESTORE THE DELTA: $150k → 12%AIR ALLIANCE HOUSTON: $200k → 16%SEEC INSTITUTE: $10k → 14%BLACK MILLENIALS 4 FLINT: $200k → 17%APPALACHAIN VOICES: $200k → 21%UNTIL JUSTICE: $150k → 15%R STREET INSTITUTE: $75k → 14%R STREET INSTITUTE: $75k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

MT
MN
CA
KY
TN
NC
DC
LA
TX
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.

58%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.7M · 9 repeat orgs$2.0M to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
4

Total granted

$2.7M
$1.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
0%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 51% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $440k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentEducationCivil RightsCommunity ImprovementAnimalsOther
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

  • BA
    BlueGreen Alliance Foundation
    2× · 2022–2024 · $420k · revenue +76%
  • AV
    APPALACHIAN VOICES
    2× · 2022–2023 · $400k · revenue +34%
  • RS
    R STREET INSTITUTE
    2× · 2022–2023 · $150k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • MULTIPLIER
    one grant, 2024 · $1.2M · revenue 0%
  • DF
    DATA FOR SOCIAL GOOD FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $200k · revenue -47% · 44% of their budget
  • C
    CarbonPlangraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $100k · revenue +59%
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
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
2
Climate Parliament Inc

Researching policy ideas on climate and clean energy in India, engaging legislators and business leaders to discuss those ideas.

International
3
Collaborative Earth Institute

We are scientists and engineers, humanists and designers. Coming together across disciplinary and cultural boundaries, we form focused teams to discover and co-create pathways to social and ecological regeneration.

Science & Tech
4
One Earth Philanthropy

One Earth connects thinkers, doers, activists, and knowledge holders from around the world to solve humanity's greatest ecological challenges--together. Our belief is simple: The solutions to the climate crisis already exist. By connecting…

Environment
5
The Breakthrough Institute

The Breakthrough Institute is a research center that identifies and promotes technological solutions to environmental and human development challenges.

Environment
6
Rocky Mountain Institute

Transform the global energy system to secure a clean, prosperous, zero-carbon future for all.

—
7
Ceres Inc

Ceres is a nonprofit advocacy organization working to accelerate the transition to a cleaner, more just, and resilient world. through education and research, we make the business case for action on the most pressing sustainability…

Environment
8
Third Way

To research and develop centrist policy ideas.

Civil Rights
9
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
10
E3G Third Generation Environmentalism

E3g is a leading international not-for-profit think tank specialising in climate diplomacy harnessing expertise in the politics and economics of climate change.

Environment
11
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
12
Fresh Energy

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

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Seec Institute Inc; the most unlike its peers is Until Justice Data Partners 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

17 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. 17 of the 18 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
6/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MULTIPLIER: $1,217,514 · EnvironmentMULTIPLIERBlueGreen Alliance Foundation: $420,000 · EnvironmentBlueGreen Alliance FoundationYOUNG GIFTED & GREEN: $400,000 · EnvironmentYOUNG GIFTED & GREENAIR ALLIANCE HOUSTON: $400,000 · EnvironmentAIR ALLIANCE HOUSTONAPPALACHIAN VOICES: $400,000 · EnvironmentAPPALACHIAN VOICESRESTORE THE DELTA: $300,000 · EnvironmentRESTORE THE DELTA+3 more: $300,000 · Environment+3 moreINSTITUTE FOR ENHANCED EQUITY: $300,000 · Civil RightsINSTITUTE FO…DATA FOR SOCIAL GOOD FOUNDATION: $200,000 · Civil RightsDATA FOR SOC…R STREET INSTITUTE: $150,000 · EducationAMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $130,000 · EducationSEEC Institute Inc: $25,000 · EducationUNTIL JUSTICE DATA PARTNERS INC: $300,000 · Community ImprovementSOUND FISHERIES INC: $100,000 · AnimalsSUSTAINABLE FORESTRY AND LAND RETENTION NETWORK: $10,000 · OtherONE MONTANA: $10,000 · Other
Environment$3,437,514Civil Rights$500,000Education$305,000Community Improvement$300,000Animals$100,000Other$20,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMULTIPLIER: $1,217,514 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetBlueGreen Alliance Foundation: $420,000 over 2y, 4.6% of budgetYOUNG GIFTED & GREEN: $400,000 over 2y, 28% of budgetAIR ALLIANCE HOUSTON: $400,000 over 2y, 7.9% of budgetAPPALACHIAN VOICES: $400,000 over 2y, 4.0% of budgetRESTORE THE DELTA: $300,000 over 2y, 10% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR ENHANCED EQUITY: $300,000 over 2y, 10.0% of budgetUNTIL JUSTICE DATA PARTNERS INC: $300,000 over 2y, 53% of budgetDATA FOR SOCIAL GOOD FOUNDATION: $200,000 over 1y, 44% of budgetR STREET INSTITUTE: $150,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetAMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $130,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOUND FISHERIES INC: $100,000 over 1y, 99% of budgetCarbonPlan: $100,000 over 1y, 4.6% of budgetAINA MOMONA: $100,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetSEEC Institute Inc: $25,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetONE MONTANA: $10,000 over 1y, 2.5% 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.

Environmental Defense…Amalgamated Charitabl…Tides FoundationWindward FundUnited States Energy …Silicon Valley Commun…New Venture FundRockefeller Philanthr…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Environmental Defense Fund IncorporatedNY15.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Tides Foundation · Windward Fund · United States Energy Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · New Venture Fund · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Center for Carbon Removal funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Center for Carbon Removal. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%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
    3report 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.

    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 18 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Center for Carbon Removal’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