Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

Climate Imperative Foundation

CLIMATE IMPERATIVE FOUNDATION's mission is to employ science and economics to cut global carbon emissions to secure a better future for all.

$243M
Granted FY2024still arriving
96
Grants FY2024still arriving
20
States reached
$30M
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.

Environment$532MPublic Benefit$3.1MEducation$1.3MCivil Rights$800kHealth$749kEmployment$745kPhilanthropy$550kSocial Science$300kOther$0
02FY2024 · 96 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 96 grants below total $161,545,113 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $242,899,738 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $81,354,625 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $50k–250k18 grants · $2.7M
  • $250k+78 grants · $159M
$500,000
Median grant
20
States reached
$110M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ENERGY FOUNDATION CHINA (EFC)$29,750,000
SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION$23,050,000
US ENERGY FOUNDATION$15,167,150
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL (NRDC)$7,875,000
ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE (RMI)$7,640,000
TIDES FOUNDATION$4,146,268
ROCKEFELLER FAMILY FUND INC$3,475,000
BUILDING DECARBONIZATION COALITION (BDC)$3,350,000
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND$3,175,000
ENERGY AND CLIMATE TRANSITIONS AI LLC$3,127,932
VOTE SOLAR$3,000,000
THE PARTNERSHIP PROJECT$3,000,000
EARTHJUSTICE$2,680,000
EVERGREEN COLLABORATIVE$2,400,000
CLIMATE STRATEGIES LAB (INDUSTRIOUS LABS)$2,356,750
02The need
03

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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 46% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%Building Decarbonization Coalition: $3.5M → 10%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL (NRDC): $7.9M → 17%International Sustainable Energy Foundation: $3.2M → 10%CLIMATE STRATEGIES LAB (INDUSTRIOUS LABS): $2.4M → 16%BUILDING DECARBONIZATION COALITION (BDC): $3.4M → 10%Natural Resources Defense Council: $7.4M → 17%CLIMATE STRATEGIES LAB: $2.2M → 16%SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION FBO SIERRA CLUB CALIFORNIA: $13.3M → 12%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $5.8M → 17%Climate Strategies Lab: $2.2M → 16%Sierra Club Foundation: $25.6M → 10%SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION FBO SIERRA CLUB CALIFORNIA: $5.8M → 12%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $2.9M → 17%Rocky Mountain Institute: $13.8M → 12%SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $23.1M → 10%ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE (RMI): $7.6M → 12%VOTE SOLAR: $3.0M → 10%ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE: $4.1M → 12%Vote Solar: $3.0M → 10%ROCKEFELLER FAMILY FUND INC: $3.5M → 17%TIDES FOUNDATION: $4.1M → 10%Rockefeller Family Fund Inc: $2.7M → 17%League of Conservation Voters Education Fund: $3.7M → 14%TIDES FOUNDATION FBO DATA FOR PROGRESS EDUCATION FUND: $2.3M → 10%CLASP: $3.0M → 14%CLASP: $2.7M → 14%International Council on Clean Transportation: $2.4M → 14%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $2.4M → 14%ENERGY FOUNDATION CHINA (EFC): $29.8M → 10%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $2.1M → 14%The Energy Foundation: $27.0M → 10%THE ENERGY FOUNDATION: $23.3M → 10%THE ENERGY FOUNDATION: $18.5M → 10%UNITED STATES ENERGY FOUNDATION: $10.4M → 10%UNITED STATES ENERGY FOUNDATION: $6.5M → 10%UNITED STATES ENERGY FOUNDATION: $5.6M → 10%EARTHJUSTICE: $2.7M → 10%West Harlem Environmental Action Inc: $2.5M → 17%WE ACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE: $2.1M → 17%ENERGY AND CLIMATE TRANSITIONS AI LLC: $3.1M → 10%United States Energy Foundation: $19.6M → 10%US ENERGY FOUNDATION: $15.2M → 10%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $3.2M → 17%Environmental Defense Fund: $2.5M → 17%Windward Fund: $3.3M → 14%EVERGREEN COLLABORATIVE: $2.4M → 14%Evergreen Collaborative: $2.0M → 14%UNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INC FBO US CLIMATE ALLIANCE: $5.3M → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

Which US states your grants reach

VT
WA
MT
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
IA
IN
OH
PA
CA
CO
MO
KY
WV
VA
MD
DE
AR
TN
NC
SC
DC
LA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region — $81M on the FY2024 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)$62M · 76% · 18 grants

Stated purpose: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

East Asia and the Pacific$15M · 19% · 9 grants

Stated purpose: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

South America$2.4M · 3% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

South Asia$1.6M · 2% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your 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.

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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$482M · 96 repeat orgs$24M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +22% since the first grant, against +11% for the ones you funded once.

96 repeat relationships — 73 still active in FY2024, 23 since wound down; 16 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

96
47

Total granted

$482M
$18M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+11%

Still filing today

93%
85%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6.7M went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentPublic BenefitEducationInternationalCommunity ImprovementCivil RightsOther

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

  • TE
    THE ENERGY FOUNDATION
    4× · 2021–2024 · $99M · revenue +31% · 32% of their budget
  • UNITED STATES ENERGY FOUNDATION
    5× · 2020–2024 · $57M · revenue +40%
  • Rocky Mountain Institute
    5× · 2020–2024 · $28M · revenue +183%

Funded once

  • TE
    TSINGHUA EDUCATION FOUNDATION NA INC
    one grant, 2023 · $1.5M · revenue -86%
  • ET
    E3G THIRD GENERATION ENVIRONMENTALISM
    one grant, 2022 · $1.0M · revenue +18% · 93% of their budget
  • MULTIPLIER
    one grant, 2022 · $1.0M · revenue +17%

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
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
2
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
3
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators

The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.

Education
4
The Climate Group Inc

Climate group advances climate action by mobilizing business and government leadership to drive systemic decarbonization across energy, transport, and industry, while engaging the public through large-scale convenings and global platforms.…

Environment
5
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
6
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
7
Climate Catalyst Inc

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

Environment
8
Watttime Corporation

To raise awareness about the potential to reduce environmental harm by shifting electricity use to particular times; to encourage the development and spread of common protocols for this practice.

Science & Tech
9
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
10
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
11
Partnership for Policy Integrity

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

Environment
12
Clean Energy Group Inc

Clean energy research and advocacy. Clean Energy Group promotes effective clean energy policies, develops low carbon technology innovation strategies and promotes new financial tools to strengthen the economy and stabilize climate change.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environment America Inc and the most unlike its peers is Together Louisiana. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyCommunity FoundationsCommunity FoundationsAffordable Housing Construc…Health Access Advocacy and …Affordable Housing Developm…Community College Foundatio…Cancer Support ServicesEnvironmental Conservation …Policy Research and Advocacy
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 27 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number24%5%<5yr15%13%5–10yr20%21%10–20yr17%25%20–35yr11%25%35–55yr13%12%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value24%1%<5yr15%19%5–10yr20%9%10–20yr17%13%20–35yr11%34%35–55yr13%25%55yr+

The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/168
the rest of the field
14%
26,003/186,810

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

04the grantee network

154 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 154 of the 169 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

22
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
25
Early backer (in before they grew)
154/154
Grantees still filing
89/154
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION — $67,762,000 · EnvironmentSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATIONNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC — $24,223,000 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INCThe Partnership Project Inc — $12,000,000 · EnvironmentLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND — $9,941,000 · EnvironmentBUILDING DECARBONIZATION COALITION — $8,710,000 · Environment+72 more — $127,116,068 · Environment+72 moreTHE ENERGY FOUNDATION — $98,577,000 · OtherTHE ENERGY FOUNDATIONRocky Mountain Institute — $28,287,500 · OtherRocky Mountain InstituteCLIMATE STRATEGIES LAB LLC — $7,087,868 · Other+54 more — $41,905,012 · Other+54 moreUNITED STATES ENERGY FOUNDATION — $57,275,230 · PhilanthropyUNITED STATES ENE…TIDES FOUNDATION — $9,611,268 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUNDATIONROCKEFELLER FAMILY FUND INC — $9,352,325 · PhilanthropyROCKEFELLER FAMIL…COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER JOHNSTOWN — $2,815,000 · Philanthropy+3 more — $2,178,120 · PhilanthropyUNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INC — $7,150,000 · InternationalPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY — $1,650,000 · InternationalTSINGHUA EDUCATION FOUNDATION NA INC — $1,500,000 · InternationalWORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE — $1,250,000 · InternationalPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY — $742,192 · InternationalTHE ASIA FOUNDATION — $590,000 · International+3 more — $850,000 · InternationalBERKELEY LAB FOUNDATION — $3,230,000 · EducationPUBLIC HEALTH LAW CENTER INC — $1,230,986 · EducationAlliance for a Green Economy Inc — $1,039,867 · EducationWEST VIRGINIA CITIZEN ACTION EDUCATION FUND — $950,000 · EducationPURPOSE FOUNDATION — $850,000 · EducationTHE ROOSEVELT INSTITUTE — $600,000 · EducationTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA — $550,000 · Education+6 more — $970,000 · EducationCENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS — $3,750,000 · Civil RightsLEADERSHIP COUNSEL FOR JUSTICE AND ACCOUNTABILITY — $900,000 · Civil Rights+2 more — $300,000 · Civil RightsAMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION — $3,098,982 · HealthGREEN & HEALTHY HOMES INITIATIVE INC — $1,700,000 · Health
Environment$249,752,068Other$175,857,380Philanthropy$81,231,943International$13,732,192Education$9,420,853Civil Rights$4,950,000Health$4,798,982

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTHE ENERGY FOUNDATION — $98,577,000 over 4y, 32% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION — $67,762,000 over 5y, 29% of budgetUNITED STATES ENERGY FOUNDATION — $57,275,230 over 5y, 7.8% of budgetRocky Mountain Institute — $28,287,500 over 5y, 9.9% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC — $24,223,000 over 5y, 3.9% of budgetThe Partnership Project Inc — $12,000,000 over 5y, 12% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND — $9,941,000 over 4y, 7.2% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION — $9,611,268 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetROCKEFELLER FAMILY FUND INC — $9,352,325 over 4y, 16% of budgetBUILDING DECARBONIZATION COALITION — $8,710,000 over 4y, 22% of budgetInternational Sustainable Energy Foundation — $8,323,000 over 3y, 14% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED — $7,995,700 over 5y, 1.1% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE — $7,590,000 over 4y, 2.0% of budgetCLASP — $7,325,000 over 4y, 19% of budgetUNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INC — $7,150,000 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetWest Harlem Environmental Action Inc — $7,025,000 over 5y, 23% of budgetVote Solar — $6,400,000 over 3y, 32% of budgetWINDWARD FUND — $6,187,786 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetEVERGREEN COLLABORATIVE — $5,800,000 over 4y, 30% of budgetTHE INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON CLEAN TRANSPORTATION INC — $4,747,300 over 5y, 6.9% of budgetSECURING AMERICA'S FUTURE ENERGY FOUNDATION — $4,677,000 over 3y, 20% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY PROJECT — $4,572,790 over 4y, 29% of budgetRESOURCES LEGACY FUND — $4,400,000 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetBlueGreen Alliance Foundation — $4,191,000 over 5y, 14% of budgetCLIMATE JOBS NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER INC — $3,900,000 over 4y, 21% of budgetCENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS — $3,750,000 over 4y, 3.9% of budgetCLIMATEWORKS FOUNDATION — $3,300,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetAdvanced Energy Institute — $3,250,000 over 4y, 13% of budgetBERKELEY LAB FOUNDATION — $3,230,000 over 4y, 29% of budgetAMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION — $3,098,982 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER JOHNSTOWN — $2,815,000 over 2y, 4.4% of budgetSOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER — $2,623,182 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetASSOCIATION FOR ENERGY AFFORDABILITY INC — $2,344,148 over 4y, 2.8% of budgetCERES INC — $2,285,000 over 4y, 2.3% of budgetAPPALACHIAN VOICES — $2,000,000 over 2y, 16% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND — $1,850,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetREGULATORY ASSISTANCE PROJECT — $1,796,601 over 2y, 10.0% of budgetGREEN & HEALTHY HOMES INITIATIVE INC — $1,700,000 over 3y, 5.8% of budgetPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY — $1,650,000 over 5y, 13% of budgetMIGHTY EARTH INC — $1,550,000 over 2y, 16% of budgetROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC — $1,528,120 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetTSINGHUA EDUCATION FOUNDATION NA INC — $1,500,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetGridLab Inc — $1,471,156 over 3y, 18% of budgetGlobal Energy Monitor — $1,436,000 over 3y, 8.3% of budgetCE BUYERS INSTITUTE — $1,400,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetEnvironmental Health Coalition — $1,400,000 over 2y, 14% of budgetNORTHEAST STATES FOR COORDINATED AIR USE MANAGEMENT INC — $1,340,000 over 4y, 9.4% of budgetWORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE — $1,250,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budget
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.

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.

United States Energy …The Energy FoundationClimateworks Foundati…The William & Flora H…The Heising-Simons Fo…Natural Resources Def…New Venture FundThe McKnight Foundati…Windward FundFreedom Together Foun…Sequoia Climate Found…Environmental Defense…
United States Energy FoundationCA120.9× affinity67 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United States Energy Foundation · The Energy Foundation · Climateworks Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · The Heising-Simons Foundation · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · New Venture Fund · The McKnight Foundation · Windward Fund · Freedom Together Foundation · Sequoia Climate Foundation · Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated

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 organization Climate Imperative Foundation 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
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 24%
  • Green & Healthy Homes Initiative Inc — 100% of income from government
  • Institute for Sustainable Communities — 100% of income from government
  • Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management Inc — 100% of income from government
  • National Center for Healthy Housing Inc — 24% of income from government
  • Beyond Toxics — 13% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
  • Clean Energy States Alliance Inc — 2% of income from government
  • Ceres Inc — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
20report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
3rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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 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

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Climate Imperative Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Climate Imperative Foundation 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 169 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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 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