How much did CLIMATEWORKS FOUNDATION grant in FY2024?

Environment$204MPhilanthropy$75MInternational$52MEducation$12MPublic Benefit$11MCivil Rights$6.1MScience & Tech$5.5MSocial Science$5.2MCommunity Improvement$4.4MOther$146M

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

diplomacylobbying activitiesuclasectorsurgentregulatoryexpand

2019

reservemarket-basedcompliance carboncarbon marketsbuilt environmentgas ghgghg emissions

2020

wildernessblackhistorywild placesgppcoalitionsurgent

2021

integrateddisclosure standardsenterprisethinkingneighborhoodsindustrial pollutionscientific excellence

2022

docancestraldocumentaryfilmmakersfinancingentitiesbiology

2023

direct airair captureexclusively educationaleducational scientificfundersoil gastransform governance

2024

transition sustainabletransition cleanglobal transitionresponsible carbonremoval restoresustainable financialprotect potential

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 140 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k1 grant · $6k
$10k–50k16 grants · $411k
$50k–250k60 grants · $7.6M
$250k+63 grants · $88M

$200,000

Median grant

States reached

$533M

Total assets

Largest grants

THE ENERGY FOUNDATION$12,759,098
UNITED STATES ENERGY FOUNDATION$9,039,098
INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON CLEAN TRANSPORTATION$8,845,000
INTERNATIONAL SUSTAINABLE ENERGY FOUNDATION$6,148,938
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INC$4,182,129
ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC$3,655,000
COAL SWARM DBA GLOBAL ENERGY MONITOR$2,950,000
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL$2,833,302
PACIFIC ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCES CENTER$2,410,000
ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE$1,973,344
CALSTART INC$1,950,000
C40 CITIES CLIMATE LEADERSHIP GROUP INC$1,750,000
CLASP$1,705,659
WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE$1,540,000
PUBLIC CITIZEN FOUNDATION INC$1,413,587

02The need

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 (FY20–24, $820k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10% — the area typically sits at 10%. 74% 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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$482M · 206 repeat orgs$40M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +81% since the first grant, against +53% for the ones you funded once.

206 repeat relationships — 104 still active in FY2024, 102 since wound down; 36 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

206

128

Total granted

$482M

$31M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+81%

+53%

Still filing today

89%

84%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8.5M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EnvironmentInternationalEducationPhilanthropyPublic BenefitScience & TechOther

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

UNITED STATES ENERGY FOUNDATION
5× · 2020–2024 · $34M · revenue +40%
ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC
7× · 2017–2024 · $23M · revenue +151%
TI
THE INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON CLEAN TRANSPORTATION
8× · 2017–2024 · $21M · revenue +92% · 40% of their budget

Funded once

RL
RESOURCES LEGACY FUNDgraduated
one grant, 2022 · $6.0M · revenue +63%
TV
THE VALUE REPORTING FOUNDATION
one grant, 2021 · $5.0M · revenue +7% · 26% of their budget
EL
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW INSTITUTEgraduated
one grant, 2022 · $988k · revenue +43%

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.

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

Climate Foundation

To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.

Science & Tech

Environment Next Inc

Environment next supports individuals, nonprofits and businesses around the world on solutions to complex climate issues.

Environment

Environmental and Energy Study Institute

Educate policymakers about equitable science-based solutions for climate, energy, & the environment

—

Terraset

Terraset mission is to reduce greenhouse gases by identifying and supporting the most promising early-stage initiatives that are effectively removing carbon from the air.

Environment

Climate Breakthrough Inc

To make an outsized impact in resolving the climate crisis by freeing leaders to translate their boldest ideas into transformative climate action that swiftly and justly closes the gap between the world today and a sustainable future.

Human Services

Work on Climate

Supporting industry transformation towards climate-positive and regenerative practices and business models by helping climate-motivated professionals lead such transformation through their careers, company-building, and intrapreneurship.

Environment

Partnership for Policy Integrity

Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses science, communications, and strategic advocacy to protect forests and our climate future.

Environment

Cascade Climate Inc

To accelerate progress in interventions that harness Earths natural systems to stabilize the climate.

Environment

Climate Imperative Foundation

To cut global carbon emissions at speed and scale, and secure a better future for all.

Environment

Environment Now

—

National Caucus of Environmental

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

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Climate Resolve and the most unlike its peers is Occidental College. 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.

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 26 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 22% 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 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/361

the rest of the field

11%

206,164/1,819,204

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.

05the grantee network

322 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

319/322

Grantees still filing

263/322

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Environment$204,372,015Other$160,990,894Philanthropy$75,448,354International$52,262,489Education$11,700,588Public Benefit$11,080,260Civil Rights$6,082,976

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.

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 FoundationCA108.5× affinity72 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 · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Climate Imperative Foundation · Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · Rockefeller Brothers Fund Inc · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · Windward Fund · World Resources Institute · The Schmidt Family 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 CLIMATEWORKS 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

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

11get no government money at all

1rely 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: COUNCIL ON SUSTAINABLE AVIATION FUELS ACCOUNTABILITY.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

high risk

~0 months of operating runway; revenue contracted over 2 filed years.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

2 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 861997600 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 COUNCIL ON SUSTAINABLE AVIATION FUELS ACCOUNTABILITY, 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

FlagFinancial stability— Roughly 0 months of cash on hand.
WatchSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 100% 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 Climateworks Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Climateworks Foundation 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.

CLIMATEWORKS FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

322 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Climateworks Foundation?

More from the funding graph

CLIMATEWORKS FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

322 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Climateworks Foundation?

More from the funding graph