Skip to content
Cloud Mountain Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Cloud Mountain Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$4.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
105
Grants FY2024still arriving
28
States reached
$250k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Environment$15MPublic Benefit$4.6MArts & Culture$2.4MCivil Rights$2.2MFood & Nutrition$825kPhilanthropy$550kHealth$465kCommunity Improvement$465kOther$0
02FY2024 · 105 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $15k
  • $10k–50k71 grants · $1.8M
  • $50k–250k30 grants · $2.4M
  • $250k+1 grant · $250k
$30,000
Median grant
28
States reached
$92M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$250,000
SCIENCE & ENVIR HEALTH NETWORK$210,000
GRASSROOTS FUND$200,000
SUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION$177,000
BOLD ALLIANCE$150,000
CDER$150,000
NEW WORLD FOUND FRACKING FUND$100,000
CENTER FOR MEDIA & DEMOCRACY$100,000
NEW WORLD FOUNDATION$100,000
STORY OF STUFF$90,000
THE OTHER 98 ACTION$85,000
UNKOCH MY CAMPUSESSENTIAL INFORMATION$85,000
PROJECT OF GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT$60,000
GAIA$60,000
WESTERN MINING ACTION NETWORK$60,000
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 (FY19–22, $28k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 91% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CHILDREN EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $3k → 8%COMMUNITIES UNITED FOR ACTION: $25k → 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

AK
ME
VT
NH
WA
MT
MN
WI
NY
MA
OR
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
CO
NE
MO
WV
VA
MD
AZ
NM
TN
NC
SC
DC
OK
LA
MS
TX
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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$24M · 136 repeat orgs$2.5M to everyone else

136 repeat relationships: 85 still active in FY2024, 51 since wound down; 16 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

136
45

Total granted

$24M
$1.7M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+15%
+35%

Still filing today

56%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $810k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentPublic BenefitArts & CultureCivil RightsCommunity ImprovementEducationOther
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

  • SM
    SUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION
    6× · 2019–2024 · $2.1M · revenue +170%
  • BA
    BOLD ALLIANCE INC
    6× · 2019–2024 · $750k · revenue +15% · 61% of their budget
  • TS
    THE SHEFFIELD LAND TRUST INC
    5× · 2019–2024 · $390k · revenue +886% · 34% of their budget

Funded once

  • CF
    CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
    one grant, 2023 · $150k
  • CF
    CENTER FOR DEMOCRATIC AND ENVIRONMENT
    one grant, 2023 · $150k
  • CF
    CENTER FOR HEALTH ENVIRONMENT & JUSTICE
    one grant, 2023 · $150k
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
Partnership for Policy Integrity

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

Environment
2
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
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
CarbonPlan

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

Environment
5
Clean Water Action

Clean water action is a national citizens organization working for clean, safe, and affrodable water, prevention of health threatening pollution, creation of environmentally safe jobs and busnesses and empowerment of people to make…

—
6
Nature for Justice

To empower frontline communities to lead nature-based solutions that advance climate justice, ecosystem restoration, and resilient livelihoods through connecting locally-led initiatives to funding, markets, and technical support.

Environment
7
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
8
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
9
Open Markets Institute

The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.

Education
10
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
11
Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide

Educational & charitable. to provide legal and scientific information to public interest attorneys and scientists in numerous countries.

—
12
International Rivers Network

International Rivers protects rivers and defends the rights of communities that depend on them.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environment America Inc; the most unlike its peers is River Valley Organizing. 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

109 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. 109 of the 203 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.

11
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
32
Early backer (in before they grew)
107/109
Grantees still filing
60/109
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SCIENCE & ENVIR HEALTH NETWORK: $1,290,000 · OtherSCIENCE & ENVIR HEALTH NETWORKNEW ENGLAND GRASS ROOTS ENVIR FUND: $1,200,000 · OtherNEW ENGLAND GRASS ROOTS ENVIR FUNDIndividual grant recipient: $850,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientBOLD ALLIANCE INC: $750,000 · Other+124 more: $11,733,025 · Other+124 moreSUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION: $2,143,000 · EnvironmentSUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUN…THE SHEFFIELD LAND TRUST INC: $390,000 · EnvironmentTHE SHEFFIELD LAND TRUST…LOUISIANA BUCKET BRIGADE: $285,000 · EnvironmentWEST VIRGINIA RIVERS COALITION INC: $280,000 · EnvironmentDEEP SOUTH CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL: $240,000 · EnvironmentBERKSHIRE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION TEAM INC: $230,000 · EnvironmentMOUNTAIN WATERSHED ASSOCIATION INC: $220,000 · Environment+26 more: $2,229,000 · Environment+26 moreCENTER FOR MEDIA AND DEMOCRACY INC: $665,000 · Arts & CultureCENTER FO…Coalition for Good Governance: $360,000 · Arts & CultureCoalition…COLUMBUS INSTITUTE FOR COMTEMPORARY JOURNALISM: $355,000 · Arts & CultureCOLUMBUS …TRUTHOUT: $260,000 · Arts & CultureTRUTHOUTGlobal Press Institute: $175,000 · Arts & CultureGlobal Pr…International Media Project: $115,000 · Arts & CultureMONTANA FREE PRESS: $100,000 · Arts & Culture+5 more: $250,000 · Arts & Culture+5 morePROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT INC: $225,000 · Public BenefitEarthworks: $225,000 · Public BenefitOPENSECRETS: $180,000 · Public BenefitGovernment Accountability Project: $130,000 · Public BenefitSTATE DEMOCRACY PROJECT: $100,000 · Public BenefitMASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP EDUCATION FUND INC: $95,000 · Public BenefitRepresentUs Education Fund: $40,000 · Public BenefitCenter for Common Ground: $40,000 · Public Benefit+5 more: $115,000 · Public BenefitFOOD & WATER WATCH: $280,000 · Food & NutritionINSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURE & TRADE POLICY: $255,000 · Food & NutritionSOUL FIRE FARM INSTITUTE INC: $210,000 · Food & NutritionFOOD AND ENVIRONMENT REPORTING NETWORK INC: $80,000 · Food & NutritionFREE SPEECH FOR PEOPLE INC: $250,000 · Civil RightsJUSTICE THROUGH MUSIC PROJECT: $210,000 · Civil RightsPARTNERSHIPFORCIVILJUSTICEFUND: $75,000 · Civil RightsSOUTHWEST ORGANIZING PROJECT: $70,000 · Civil RightsNew York Communities For Change Inc: $50,000 · Civil RightsFOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY FUND: $50,000 · Civil RightsTHE NEW WORLD FOUNDATION: $500,000 · PhilanthropyDATAKIND INC: $100,000 · PhilanthropySLINGSHOT FUND INC: $40,000 · Philanthropy+1 more: $20,000 · Philanthropy
Other$15,823,025Environment$6,017,000Arts & Culture$2,280,000Public Benefit$1,150,000Food & Nutrition$825,000Civil Rights$705,000Philanthropy$660,000

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION: $2,143,000 over 6y, 7.0% of budgetBOLD ALLIANCE INC: $750,000 over 6y, 61% of budgetCENTER FOR MEDIA AND DEMOCRACY INC: $665,000 over 6y, 14% of budgetTHE NEW WORLD FOUNDATION: $500,000 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetTHE SHEFFIELD LAND TRUST INC: $390,000 over 5y, 34% of budgetCoalition for Good Governance: $360,000 over 6y, 33% of budgetSCHUMACHER CENTER FOR A NEW ECONOMICS INC: $290,000 over 6y, 9.7% of budgetLOUISIANA BUCKET BRIGADE: $285,000 over 5y, 6.5% of budgetWEST VIRGINIA RIVERS COALITION INC: $280,000 over 5y, 9.1% of budgetFOOD & WATER WATCH: $280,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetTRUTHOUT: $260,000 over 5y, 3.0% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURE & TRADE POLICY: $255,000 over 5y, 6.2% of budgetFREE SPEECH FOR PEOPLE INC: $250,000 over 6y, 2.1% of budgetDEEP SOUTH CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL: $240,000 over 4y, 1.7% of budgetBERKSHIRE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION TEAM INC: $230,000 over 6y, 24% of budgetTexas Campaign for the Environment Fund: $225,000 over 6y, 4.1% of budgetPROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT INC: $225,000 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetEarthworks: $225,000 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetMOUNTAIN WATERSHED ASSOCIATION INC: $220,000 over 4y, 2.8% of budgetJUSTICE THROUGH MUSIC PROJECT: $210,000 over 6y, 14% of budgetSOUL FIRE FARM INSTITUTE INC: $210,000 over 5y, 1.8% of budgetIronbound Community Corporation: $200,000 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetCommunity Environmental Legal Defense Fund: $200,000 over 2y, 80% of budgetNEW ECONOMY COALITION INC: $200,000 over 5y, 2.9% of budgetEarth Island Institute Inc: $195,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetPROTEUS FUND INC: $185,025 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN PROMISE EDUCATION FUND INC: $185,000 over 6y, 2.5% of budgetCLEAN WATER FUND: $180,000 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetOPENSECRETS: $180,000 over 6y, 1.7% of budgetDEFEND OUR HEALTH: $180,000 over 3y, 6.3% of budgetGlobal Press Institute: $175,000 over 6y, 1.9% of budgetFAIRNESS & ACCURACY IN REPORTING INC: $170,000 over 6y, 6.3% of budgetGlobal Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives: $160,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetDEMOCRACY 21: $150,000 over 6y, 41% of budgetCOMING CLEAN INC: $150,000 over 2y, 3.3% of budgetClean Water for North Carolina Inc: $149,000 over 6y, 31% of budgetSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $145,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetMETAFOUNDATION DBA POST CARBON INSTITUTE: $145,000 over 5y, 3.2% of budgetGovernment Accountability Project: $130,000 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetWESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS: $120,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetInternational Media Project: $115,000 over 4y, 12% of budgetHONOR THE EARTH: $115,000 over 4y, 1.9% of budgetBERKSHIRE COMMUNITY LAND TRUST INC: $100,000 over 4y, 36% of budgetRAILROAD STREET YOUTH PROJECT INC: $100,000 over 6y, 2.8% of budgetDATAKIND INC: $100,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetMONTANA FREE PRESS: $100,000 over 4y, 3.1% of budgetSTATE DEMOCRACY PROJECT: $100,000 over 2y, 10% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $95,000 over 2y, 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.

  • Who funds SUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds BOLD ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR MEDIA AND DEMOCRACY INC ↗
  • Who funds THE NEW WORLD FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE SHEFFIELD LAND TRUST INC ↗
  • Who funds Coalition for Good Governance ↗
  • Who funds COLUMBUS INSTITUTE FOR COMTEMPORARY JOURNALISM ↗
  • Who funds SCHUMACHER CENTER FOR A NEW ECONOMICS INC ↗
  • Who funds LOUISIANA BUCKET BRIGADE ↗
  • Who funds WEST VIRGINIA RIVERS COALITION INC ↗
  • Who funds FOOD & WATER WATCH ↗
  • Who funds TRUTHOUT ↗
  • Who funds INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURE & TRADE POLICY ↗
  • Who funds FREE SPEECH FOR PEOPLE INC ↗
  • Who funds DEEP SOUTH CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ↗
  • Who funds BERKSHIRE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION TEAM INC ↗
  • Who funds Texas Campaign for the Environment Fund ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT INC ↗
  • Who funds Earthworks ↗
  • Who funds MOUNTAIN WATERSHED ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds JUSTICE THROUGH MUSIC PROJECT ↗
  • Who funds SOUL FIRE FARM INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds Ironbound Community Corporation ↗
  • Who funds Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund ↗
  • Who funds NEW ECONOMY COALITION INC ↗

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.

Windward FundTides FoundationRockefeller Family Fu…Amalgamated Charitabl…The Schmidt Family Fo…Park Foundation IncPatagoniaorgRsf Social Finance IncImpactassetsincUnited States Energy …New Venture FundProteus Fund Inc
Windward FundDC45.4× affinity22 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Windward Fund · Tides Foundation · Rockefeller Family Fund Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Park Foundation Inc · Patagoniaorg · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Impactassetsinc · United States Energy Foundation · New Venture Fund · Proteus Fund Inc

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 Cloud Mountain Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Cloud Mountain Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 180%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 79%
  • Ironbound Community Corporation: 100% of income from government
  • Housatonic River Initiative Inc: 79% of income from government
  • Railroad Street Youth Project Inc: 45% of income from government
  • Massachusetts Audubon Society Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
18get no government money at all
13report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely 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 203 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Cloud Mountain’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