Skip to content
Ceres Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Ceres Inc

Ceres is a nonprofit advocacy organization working to accelerate the transition to a cleaner, more just, and resilient world.

$6.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$370k
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, FY2017 to 2024.

Environment$2.5MPublic Benefit$75kArts & Culture$60kInternational$50kCommunity Improvement$49k
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $452,707, the rows itemized in this filing. The $6,514,037 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $6,061,330 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

  • Under $10k1 grant · $9k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $73k
  • $250k+1 grant · $370k
$73,333
Median grant
3
States reached
$35M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CDP NORTH AMERICA INC$370,277
FOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION$73,333
MERIDIAN INSTITUTE$9,097
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 88% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $103k → 16%SOLIDARIDAD NORTH AMERICA: $40k → 10%Business for Social Responsibility: $66k → 10%B TEAM HEADQUARTERS INC: $71k → 17%R STREET INSTITUTE: $75k → 14%MERIDIAN INSTITUTE: $113k → 9%CLIMATE COLLABORATIVE: $11k → 12%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $7k → 7%CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $37k → 16%SOLIDARIDAD NORTH AMERICA: $10k → 10%CDP NORTH AMERICA INC: $370k → 17%FOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION: $215k → 14%MERIDIAN INSTITUTE: $88k → 9%CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $20k → 16%The B Team Headquarters Inc: $67k → 17%FOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION: $209k → 14%MERIDIAN INSTITUTE: $55k → 9%CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $20k → 16%CDP NORTH AMERICA INC: $367k → 17%FOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION: $153k → 14%MERIDIAN INSTITUTE: $55k → 9%CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $20k → 16%THE B TEAM HEADQUARTERS INC: $38k → 17%FOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION: $140k → 14%MERIDIAN INSTITUTE: $45k → 9%ENVIRONMENTAL LEAGUE OF MASSACHUSETTS INC: $15k → 16%CDP NORTH AMERICA INC: $235k → 17%FOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION: $99k → 14%MERIDIAN INSTITUTE: $9k → 9%ENVIRONMENTAL LEAGUE OF MASSACHUSETTS INC: $15k → 16%THE B TEAM HEADQUARTERS INC: $14k → 17%FOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION: $73k → 14%SOCIETY FOR CORPORATE GOVERNANCE INC: $40k → 17%FOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION: $20k → 14%THE CLIMATE GROUP INC: $34k → 17%Foundation for the Global Compact: $30k → 17%THE CLIMATE GROUP INC: $23k → 17%FOUNDATION FOR THE GLOBAL COMPACT: $20k → 17%SOCIETY FOR CORPORATE GOVERNANCE INC: $9k → 17%ATLANTIC MEDIA INC: $60k → 17%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

VT
WA
NY
MA
CA
CO
VA
DC

Grants abroad, by region: $6.1M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 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)$4.1M · 68% · 6 grants

Stated purpose: TO SUPPORT INVESTOR NET ZERO COMMITMENTS, IMPLEMENTATION, AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND TO SUPPORT INVESTORS WORLDWIDE WHO ADVOCATE FOR THE POLICIES NEEDED TO ENABLE THE NET ZERO TRANSITION. · TO SUPPORT ENGAGEMENT GROUPS FOR 20 EUROPEAN, CANADIAN AND ASIAN BANKS ON THE PARIS AGREEMENT GOALS TO HELP INVESTORS UNDERSTAND AND MANAGE CLIMATE-RELATED FINANCIAL RISKS. · IN SUPPORT OF CLIMATE ACTION 100+: INVESTORS ENGAGING WITH CORPORATIONS ON CLIMATE CHANGE.

East Asia and the Pacific$1.9M · 31% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: TO SUPPORT INVESTOR NET ZERO COMMITMENTS, IMPLEMENTATION, AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND TO SUPPORT INVESTORS WORLDWIDE WHO ADVOCATE FOR THE POLICIES NEEDED TO ENABLE THE NET ZERO TRANSITION. · IN SUPPORT OF CLIMATE ACTION 100+: INVESTORS ENGAGING WITH CORPORATIONS ON CLIMATE CHANGE.

South America$40k · 1% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: TO RESEARCH CORPORATE PRACTICES AND BENCHMARK PROGRESS IN RELATION TO COMPANY DEFORESTATION COMMITMENTS AND GENERATE CONTENT FOR INVESTORS AND COMPANIES REGARDING NATURAL CLIMATE SOLUTIONS.

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.
04

Where the work is directed

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

About 12% of Ceres Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 11% of the giving stays in MA; by stated purpose, 3%.

Ceres Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 23% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.9M · 11 repeat orgs$201k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
3

Total granted

$2.9M
$201k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+42%
+70%

Still filing today

100%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentEducationPhilanthropyInternationalOther
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

  • CN
    CDP NORTH AMERICA INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $973k · revenue +42%
  • MI
    Meridian Institute
    5× · 2021–2025 · $364k · revenue +78%
  • CA
    CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $200k · revenue +156%

Funded once

  • RS
    R STREET INSTITUTEgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $75k · revenue +37%
  • BF
    BUSINESS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITYgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $66k · revenue +70%
  • AM
    ATLANTIC MEDIA INC
    one grant, 2018 · $60k
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
Climate Catalyst Inc

Climate catalyst sparks collective action to tackle the biggest climate challenges we face today: cutting emissions in heavy industries.

Environment
2
Coalition for Green Capital D/B/a American Green Bank Consortium

Cgc operates as a nonprofit financial institution that invests directly and through partners to transform financial markets by using public and private investing to accelerate the deployment of projects that strengthen the grid, reduce…

Environment
3
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
4
Terraset

Terraset uses philanthropic capital to purchase permanent, high-quality carbon removal. we pool donations from individuals, foundations, family offices, and donor advised funds, and make strategic purchases of high-quality carbon removal…

Environment
5
Climate Leadership Council Inc

To develop and promote a carbon dividends framework - based on carbon fees whose revenues are rebated to citizens through dividends - as the most cost-effective, equitable, and politically viable climate solution.

Environment
6
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
7
Climate Breakthrough Inc

To launch breakthrough climate mitigation efforts by identifying, supporting, and unleashing innovative leaders with transformative strategies.

Human Services
8
Center for Climate and Energy Solutions Inc

The nonpartisan center for climate and energy solutions works to secure a safe and stable climate by accelerating the global transition to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions and a thriving, just, and resilient economy. for over 25 years,…

Environment
9
Sustainable World Inc

See schedule o part i for description of the organizations mission.

Environment
10
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
11
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
12
Cleaner Economy Coalition Inc

Driving american jobs and competitiveness by leveraging our cleaner economy and enabling u.s. manufacturers to lead in advanced energy technologies.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cdp North America Inc; the most unlike its peers is Forest Trends Association. 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

14 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. 14 of the 15 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
11/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CDP NORTH AMERICA INC: $972,766 · EnvironmentCDP NORTH AMERICA INCFOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION: $908,916 · EnvironmentFOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATIONCLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $199,500 · EnvironmentCLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INCB TEAM HEADQUARTERS INC: $189,000 · EnvironmentB TEAM HEADQUARTERS INC+4 more: $216,225 · Environment+4 moreMeridian Institute: $363,750 · PhilanthropyMeridian Inst…R STREET INSTITUTE: $75,000 · EducationBUSINESS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: $65,516 · EducationATLANTIC MEDIA INC: $60,000 · OtherSOCIETY FOR CORPORATE GOVERNANCE INC: $49,188 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $7,000 · OtherFOUNDATION FOR THE GLOBAL COMPACT: $50,000 · International
Environment$2,486,407Philanthropy$363,750Education$140,516Other$116,188International$50,000

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 budgetCDP NORTH AMERICA INC: $972,766 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetFOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION: $908,916 over 7y, 2.2% of budgetMeridian Institute: $363,750 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetCLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $199,500 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetB TEAM HEADQUARTERS INC: $189,000 over 4y, 1.7% of budgetCLIMATE COLLABORATIVE: $80,000 over 3y, 9.4% of budgetR STREET INSTITUTE: $75,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetBUSINESS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: $65,516 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE CLIMATE GROUP INC: $56,250 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR THE GLOBAL COMPACT: $50,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetSOLIDARIDAD NORTH AMERICA: $49,975 over 2y, 3.8% of budgetSOCIETY FOR CORPORATE GOVERNANCE INC: $49,188 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL LEAGUE OF MASSACHUSETTS INC: $30,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

New Venture FundThe David and Lucile …Climateworks Foundati…The William & Flora H…John D and Catherine …The Blackbaud Giving …Morgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
New Venture FundDC16.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: New Venture Fund · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Climateworks Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Ceres Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ceres Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%3%6%10%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
    2get no government money at all
    2report 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 15 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 Ceres’ 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