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

· Public charity

Clean Energy Group Inc

Clean energy research and advocacy.

$140k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$20k
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, FY2021 to 2025.

Environment$427kYouth Development$50kCivil Rights$30kCrime & Legal$20kCommunity Improvement$20k
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$20,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$2.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Clean Energy Action$20,000
Baltimore Green Justice Worker$20,000
Green Building United$20,000
People United for Sustainable Housing Inc$20,000
Forward Together Wisconsin$20,000
Sustainable Molokai$20,000
Allapattah Collaborative$10,000
Krewe of Red Beans$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:

Its human-services grants (FY23–23, $27k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%MA Climate Action Network Inc: $27k → 16%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

WI
NY
MA
PA
CO
MD
HI
LA
FL
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.

69%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$380k · 5 repeat orgs$167k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +64% since the first grant, against -78% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
1

Total granted

$380k
$27k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+64%
-78%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $140k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentEmploymentEducationHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • BE
    BERKSHIRE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION TEAM INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $100k · revenue +7%
  • TP
    The Point Community Development Corporation
    3× · 2021–2024 · $70k · revenue +64%
  • NY
    New York Lawyers for the Public Interest Inc
    3× · 2021–2024 · $70k · revenue +15%

Funded once

  • MC
    MASSACHUSETTS CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK INC
    one grant, 2023 · $27k · revenue -78%
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
Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice

Greenaction mobilizes community power to win victories that change govenment and corporate policies and practices to protect health and promote environmental, economic and social justice.

Environment
2
Energy Justice Law and Policy Center

The organization is organized exclusively for charitable, religious, educational, and scientific purposes under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, or corresponding section of any future federal tax code.

Environment
3
Minneapolis Climate Action

Minneapolis Climate Action is a 501c(3) nonprofit founded in 2007 by a group of dedicated individuals committed to addressing climate change in their community. After almost 10 years of working at the neighborhood level and piloting the…

Environment
4
Acterra Action for a Healthy Planet

To bring people together to create local solutions for a healthy planet.

Environment
5
Educator Collective for Envionmental Justice Inc

Environmental Justice & Equality

Education
6
350 Bay Area

We are building a grassroots climate movement in the Bay Area and beyond to eliminate carbon pollution and achieve a clean energy future with racial, economic, and environmental justice.

Environment
7
Nw Energy Coalition

The NW Energy Coalition is an alliance of over 100 environmental, civic, and human service organizations, utilities, and businesses in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia, plus many individual members. The NW Energy…

—
8
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
9
Fresh Energy

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

Environment
10
Bethesda Green Inc

Bethesda green works to locally accelerate the sustainable economy with a focus on innovation, impact, and community. we are an incubator, a connector, and a community partner. we accelerate green business startups into viable companies…

Environment
11
Center for Diversity and the Environment

To racially and ethnically diversify the US Environmental Movement by developing leaders, diversifying institutions, and building community.

Environment
12
Environment Now
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Green Building United; the most unlike its peers is Clean Energy Action. 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

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.

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

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
9/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BERKSHIRE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION TEAM INC: $100,000 · EnvironmentBERKSHIRE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION TEAM INCNEW YORK CITY ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ALLIANCE INC: $70,000 · EnvironmentNEW YORK CITY ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ALLIANCE IN…CLEAN ENERGY ACTION: $20,000 · EnvironmentCLEAN ENERGY ACTIONGREEN BUILDING UNITED: $20,000 · EnvironmentGREEN BUILDING UNITEDSUSTAINABLE MOLOKAI: $20,000 · EnvironmentSUSTAINABLE MOLOKAIThe Point Community Development Corporation: $70,000 · OtherThe Point Community Development C…New York Lawyers for the Public Interest Inc: $70,000 · OtherNew York Lawyers for the Public I…THE ALLAPATTAH COLLABORATIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $10,000 · OtherTHE ALLAPATTAH COLLABORATIVE COMM…KREWE OF RED BEANS: $10,000 · OtherKREWE OF RED BEANSUPROSE INC: $70,000 · Youth DevelopmentUPROSE INCMASSACHUSETTS CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK INC: $27,000 · Human ServicesBALTIMORE GREEN JUSTICE WORKERSCOOPERATIVE INC: $20,000 · EmploymentForward Together Wisconsin: $20,000 · EducationPEOPLE UNITED FOR SUSTAINABLE HOUSING INC: $20,000 · Housing & Shelter
Environment$230,000Other$160,000Youth Development$70,000Human Services$27,000Employment$20,000Education$20,000Housing & Shelter$20,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBERKSHIRE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION TEAM INC: $100,000 over 2y, 9.2% of budgetThe Point Community Development Corporation: $70,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetNew York Lawyers for the Public Interest Inc: $70,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetNEW YORK CITY ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ALLIANCE INC: $70,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetUPROSE INC: $70,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetMASSACHUSETTS CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK INC: $27,000 over 1y, 8.0% of budgetCLEAN ENERGY ACTION: $20,000 over 1y, 38% of budgetBALTIMORE GREEN JUSTICE WORKERSCOOPERATIVE INC: $20,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetForward Together Wisconsin: $20,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetKREWE OF RED BEANS: $10,000 over 1y, 1.0% 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.

Tides FoundationSolutions Project IncUnited States Energy …Amalgamated Charitabl…New York City Environ…The Scherman Foundati…Movement Strategy Cen…Surdna Foundation IncWindward FundThe Ford FoundationNational Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…
Tides FoundationCA18.9× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tides Foundation · Solutions Project Inc · United States Energy Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · New York City Environmental Justice Alliance Inc · The Scherman Foundation Inc · Movement Strategy Center · Surdna Foundation Inc · Windward Fund · The Ford Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%3%10%23%40%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
    5report 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 14 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 Clean Energy Group’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