Loading…
· Public charity
CENTER ON RACE POVERTY & THE ENVIRONMENT
Our mission is to achieve environmental justice and healthy, sustainable communities through collective action and the law.
$223k
Granted FY2024
4
Grants
1
Communities
$97k
Largest
01What you fund
0192% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.
Environment$1.2MPhilanthropy$363kHuman Services$325kHealth$254kArts & Culture$222kCrime & Legal$124kCivil Rights$97kOther$224k
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2018
food farmingpowerpansendreliancehazardouspesticides
2019
food farmingpowerpansendreliancehazardouspesticides
2020
cleanwater
2021
—
2022
kern roadsroads workforceagroecologywukchumnifood farming
2023
cafa liquidationhrtp
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2024 · 4 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k2 grants · $50k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $172k
$75,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$5.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
- Wukchumni Tribe$97,445
- Bear Mountain Recreation & Pa$75,000
- Committee for a Better Arvin$33,400
- Committee for A Better Shafte$16,700
02The need
04
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:
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $325k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18% — the area typically sits at 12%. 92% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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 line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
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.
81%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$2.3M · 11 repeat orgs$546k to everyone else
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +490% since the first grant, against +136% for the ones you funded once.
11 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
11
7
Total granted
$2.3M
$546k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+490%
+136%
Still filing today
82%
57%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
EnvironmentHuman ServicesHealthCrime & LegalPhilanthropyArts & CultureOther
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
- EQEl Quinto Sol de America5× · 2017–2023 · $285k · revenue +248%
- SESocial & Environmental Entrep2× · 2022–2023 · $222k · revenue +490%
- WTWukchumni Tribe2× · 2022–2024 · $222k · revenue +831% · 47% of their budget
Funded once
Community Initiativesgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $363k · revenue +111%- LCLeadership Counsel for Justicgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $97k · revenue +140%
- AUArvin Unified School Districtone grant, 2022 · $45k
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
Central California Environmental
To empower our communities and secure our childrens future by eliminating negative enviromental impacts in low income and communities of color in the Central Valley.
Environment
2
The Climate Center
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
Education
3
California Rural Legal Assistance
CRLAF works for social justice and equity for farmworkers and the underserved in rural California through outreach, community education, legislative and administrative advocacy, class action litigation, and direct representation. In 2021,…
—
4
Center for Community Advocacy
Identify, cultivate, and recognize leadership from farmworkers and low-income families to expand opportunities in their lives.
—
5
CalWild
CalWild protects our state's drinking water and wild places by seeking new protections for streams and natural areas on public lands. Current campaigns include: the Sierra Forests, NW CA, the Desert, the San Gabriel Mts and the Central…
—
6
California Coastkeeper
California Coastkeeper Alliance coordinates, supports & enhances the work of the local California Waterkeeper programs to provide a statewide voice for safeguarding California's waters, and its world renowned coast & ocean, for the benefit…
Environment
7
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
8
Central Coast Alliance United for a
To build grassroots power to realize social, economic and environmental justice for the people of the Central Coast Region through policy research, leadership development, organizing and advocacy.
Community Improvement
9
Community Initiatives for Collective Impact
Our mission is to join diverse people, ideas, and resources to address the most pressing social and environmental justice priorities. We believe that the community concerns of Californias San Joaquin Valley (SJV) can only be addressed if…
Community Improvement
10
Organizacion en California de Lideres Campesinas Inc
Lideres Campesinas strengthen the leadership of farmworker women and girls so that they can be agents of economic, social and political change and ensure their human rights.
Employment
11
Central Valley Partnership
The Central Valley Partnership (CVP) conducts and collaborates in training initiatives, including community organizer training, education on labor history and issues, messaging workshops, etc., aimed at fostering the establishment of new…
Civil Rights
12
Tulare Basin Watershed Partnership
To facilitate the engagement of partners, funders, and stakeholders in multi-benefit projects to achieve the goals of promoting ecological and economic health, sustaining agricultural heritage, and enhancing quality of life in the tulare…
Environment
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Center On Race Poverty & the Environment and the most unlike its peers is Tides Center. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network
13 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
12/13
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Environment$1,203,691Philanthropy$363,406Human Services$324,645Health$253,709Other$224,003Arts & Culture$222,244Crime & Legal$123,960Civil Rights$97,445
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds El Quinto Sol de America ↗
- Who funds Community Initiatives ↗
- Who funds El Quinto Sol de America ↗
- Who funds Social & Environmental Entrep ↗
- Who funds Wukchumni Tribe ↗
- Who funds Leadership Counsel for J & A ↗
- Who funds Committee for a Better Arvin ↗
- Who funds CULTIVA LA SALUD ↗
- Who funds Cultiva La Salud ↗
- Who funds CENTER ON RACE POV & THE ENV ↗
- Who funds Leadership Counsel for Justic ↗
- Who funds Committee for Working Familie ↗
- Who funds California Rural Legal Assist ↗
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.
The California Wellness FoundationCA21.7× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: The California Wellness Foundation · The Schmidt Family Foundation · The California Endowment · Latino Community Foundation · The Keith Campbell Foundation · Sierra Health Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Movement Strategy Center · The Rose Foundation for Communities · Windward Fund · Common Counsel Foundation · The James Irvine 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 organisation CENTER ON RACE POVERTY & THE ENVIRONMENT 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
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: Committee for a Better Arvin.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
insufficient risk
Limited financial data in public filings.
Track record & reputation
low risk
6 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 35.4× since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 262262303 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on Committee for a Better Arvin, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
- WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 50% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Center on Race Poverty & the Environment?
Find your warmest path to Center on Race Poverty & the Environment through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
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