Skip to content
Center for International Environmental Law Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Center for International Environmental Law Inc

To investigate, research, write, publish, present conferences and teach with respect to global, regional, transboundary, and comparative environmental issues and to make the findings from such activities available to the general public; to conduct case investigation and advocacy, including mediation, arbitration and litigation in matters…

$574k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$190k
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Environment$575kCivil Rights$10k
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $220,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $574,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $354,000 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $30k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $190k
$190,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$13M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CENTER FOR COALFIELD JUSTICE$190,000
CLEAN WISCONSIN INC$30,000
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 (FY22–22, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%BACKBONE CAMPAIGN: $7k → 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

WA
WI
NY
OR
PA
CA
CO
WV
DC
LA
TX

Grants abroad, by region: $351k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 4 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$276k · 79% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: PETROCHEMICAL CAMPAIGN

Sub-Saharan Africa$38k · 11% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: CLIMATE LITIGATION SUPPORT · CIVIL SOCIETY MEETINGS

East Asia and the Pacific$30k · 9% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: RESEARCH REPORT ON PETROCHEMICALS LANDSCAPE IN ASIA-PACIFIC · WORKSHOP OF CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS IN THE PACIFIC ISLANDS

Central America and the Caribbean$8k · 2% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CIVIL SOCIETY MEETINGS

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
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
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
2
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
3
Texas Clean Energy Coalition
—
4
Earthjustice

Earthjustice is a premier nonprofit public interest environmental law organization. we wield the power of law and the strength of partnership to protect people's health, to preserve magnificent places and wildlife, to advance clean energy,…

Environment
5
Texas Campaign for the Environment

Empowering Texans to fight pollution through sustained grassroots organizing campaigns that shift corporate and governmental policy.

Environment
6
Western Resource Advocates

Western Resource Advocates (WRA) is a regional nonprofit advocacy organization fighting climate change and its impacts to sustain the environment, economy, and people of the West. As the region's go-to experts for more than three decades,…

Crime & Legal
7
Great Basin Resource Watch

Natural resource protection: Protected communities and the environment from the negative impacts of mineral development; provided support to communities impacted by mining

Environment
8
Center for Environmental Accountability

The Center for Environmental Accountability (CEA) is a not-for-profit organization that educates Americans on the importance of transparency and accountability in environmental and energy policy. CEA's work is informed by its core…

Environment
9
Environment Now
—
10
Partnership for Policy Integrity

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

Environment
11
Global Envirotech Initiative
Philanthropy
12
Science & Environmental Health Network

In service to communities, the earth and future generations, the science and environmental health network forges science, ethics, and law into tools for action.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environmental Integrity Project; the most unlike its peers is River Valley Organizing. 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

21 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
12
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/21
Grantees still filing
17/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CENTER FOR COALFIELD JUSTICE: $375,000 · EnvironmentCENTER FOR COALFIELD JUSTICECLEAN WISCONSIN INC: $30,000 · EnvironmentCLEAN WISCONSIN INCGlobal Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives: $23,250 · Environment+6 more: $61,200 · Environment+6 moreMID-OHIO VALLEY CLIMATE ACTION: $10,000 · OtherMID-OHIO …ENVIRONMENTAL LAW ALLIANCE WORLDWIDE: $9,611 · OtherENVIRONME…BLUE OCEAN LAW: $9,500 · OtherBLUE OCEA…The 5 Gyres Institute: $9,250 · OtherThe 5 Gyr…CARRIZO COMECRUDO NATION OF TEXAS INC: $8,815 · OtherCARRIZO C…Earthworks: $12,000 · Public BenefitTexas Campaign for the Environment Fund: $10,000 · Housing & ShelterPROMOTE PT: $10,000 · Community ImprovementINSTITUTE FOR ENHANCED EQUITY: $10,000 · Civil RightsBackbone Campaign: $6,795 · Human Services
Environment$489,450Other$47,176Public Benefit$12,000Housing & Shelter$10,000Community Improvement$10,000Civil Rights$10,000Human Services$6,795

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 budgetCENTER FOR COALFIELD JUSTICE: $375,000 over 2y, 5.7% of budgetGlobal Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives: $23,250 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetFRACTRACKER ALLIANCE: $14,250 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetEarthworks: $12,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTexas Campaign for the Environment Fund: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetPROMOTE PT: $10,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetMOUNTAIN WATERSHED ASSOCIATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCalhoun County Resource Watch: $10,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR ENHANCED EQUITY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL LAW ALLIANCE WORLDWIDE: $9,611 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY PROJECT: $9,250 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetThe 5 Gyres Institute: $9,250 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCARRIZO COMECRUDO NATION OF TEXAS INC: $8,815 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetSUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION: $7,700 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBackbone Campaign: $6,795 over 1y, 2.2% 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.

Resources Legacy FundThe Schmidt Family Fo…PatagoniaorgWindward FundRockefeller Family Fu…Rockefeller Philanthr…Tides FoundationAmalgamated Charitabl…United States Energy …EarthworksSierra ClubPark Foundation Inc
Resources Legacy FundCA27.7× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Resources Legacy Fund · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Windward Fund · Rockefeller Family Fund Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Tides Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · United States Energy Foundation · Earthworks · Sierra Club · Park 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 Center for International Environmental Law Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Center for International Environmental Law Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 Center for International Environmental Law Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Center for International Environmental Law 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 19 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 International Environmental Law’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