Skip to content
Co2 Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Co2 Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$2.3M
Granted FY2025still arriving
34
Grants FY2025still arriving
17
States reached
$190k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Environment$1.1MEducation$132kArts & Culture$119kCommunity Improvement$83kPublic Benefit$57kAnimals$48kCivil Rights$46kPublic Safety & Disaster$23k
02FY2025 · 34 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $9k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $253k
  • $50k–250k22 grants · $2.0M
$71,250
Median grant
17
States reached
$5.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CLIMATE CENTRAL INC$190,000
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION$189,744
YALE UNIVERSITY$145,098
Individual grant recipient$99,623
THE CONVERSATION US$99,350
GRIST MAGAZINE INC$97,050
URBAN INSTITUTE$95,000
NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION$95,000
CLIMATE FOUNDATION$85,500
OREGON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL (OEC)$84,250
WGBH EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION$76,000
GOODPOWER$75,000
ECOADAPT$73,750
SOUTHEAST COASTAL OCEAN OBSERVING REGIONAL ASSOCIATION (SECOORA)(FOR SCDRP)$73,150
NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH$71,250
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 (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 75% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS - CHISPA AZ: $57k → 11%NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $95k → 16%THE CONVERSATION US: $99k → 8%WGBH EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $76k → 16%MONTANA HEALTH PROFESSIONALS FOR A HEALTHY CLIMATE (MTHPHC): $47k → 9%MONGABAY: $71k → 7%SOCIAL GOOD FUND (FOR AMERICA ADAPTS): $58k → 9%INQUIRING SYSTEMS INC: $33k → 9%URBAN ECOLOGY (FOR KNEEDEEP TIMES): $43k → 10%TECH FOR CHANGE: $71k → 11%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $68k → 17%PREVENTABLE SURPRISES: $48k → 20%NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH: $71k → 10%URBAN INSTITUTE: $95k → 14%WISCONSIN ACADEMY: $29k → 10%AFFILIATED TRIBES OF NORTHWEST INDIANS: $46k → 12%CONSERVATION BIOLOGY INSTITUTE: $67k → 18%YALE UNIVERSITY: $145k → 12%URBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK (USDN): $47k → 16%UTAH FILM CENTER (FOR THE HERE NOW PROJECT): $38k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON - FRIDAY HARBOR LABS: $85k → 10%ECOADAPT: $74k → 10%TRANSMEDIAVISION USA INC: $50k → 11%WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC (FOR WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY EXTE: $34k → 19%CLIMATE CENTRAL INC: $190k → 11%GREATER WASHINGTON EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION INC: $71k → 7%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $28k → 8%GBH EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $48k → 16%POINT REYES BIRD OBSERVATORY: $50k → 9%ZERO FOODPRINT: $45k → 10%CONSERVATION BIOLOGY INSTITUTE: $60k → 18%YALE PROGRAM ON CLIMATE CHANGE COMMUNICATION (YPCCC): $49k → 12%UTAH FILM CENTER: $71k → 8%ECOADAPT: $48k → 10%EARTH OVERSHOOT - TRANSMEDIAVISION: $50k → 11%CLIMATE CENTRAL: $50k → 11%THE CONVERSATION US: $83k → 8%POINT BLUE CONSERVATION SCIENCE: $48k → 9%KNEE DEEP TIMES: $40k → 10%COMMON GOAL: $100k → 20%CONSERVATION BIOLOGY INSTITUTE: $57k → 18%YALE PROGRAM ON CLIMATE CHANGE COMMUNICATION: $48k → 12%CLIMATE CENTRAL: $48k → 11%GOODPOWER: $75k → 16%CONSERVATION BIOLOGY INSTITUTE: $48k → 18%UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $190k → 9%ACTION FOR THE CLIMATE EMERGENCY (ACE): $71k → 16%CLIMATE FOUNDATION: $86k → 9%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

WA
MT
IL
WI
NY
MA
OR
NJ
CT
CA
UT
AZ
NC
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.
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 13% of Co2 Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Co2 Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 12% 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.

45%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 14 repeat orgs$2.1M to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 21 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
20

Total granted

$1.7M
$709k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+16%
+109%

Still filing today

86%
30%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 36% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.4M went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentArts & CultureEducationScience & TechPublic BenefitFood & NutritionOther
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

  • CC
    CLIMATE CENTRAL INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $290k · revenue +54%
  • CB
    CONSERVATION BIOLOGY INSTITUTE
    4× · 2022–2025 · $237k · revenue +17%
  • Grist Magazine Inc
    2× · 2024–2025 · $195k · revenue +3%

Funded once

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON - FRIDAY HARBOR LABS
    one grant, 2024 · $85k
  • GE
    GOODPOWER EDUCATION FUND INC
    one grant, 2024 · $71k · revenue -17%
  • UF
    UTAH FILM CENTERgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $71k · revenue +54%
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
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
CarbonPlan

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

Environment
3
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
4
Environment Next Inc

Environment next supports individuals, nonprofits and businesses around the world on solutions to complex climate issues. we provide leadership, outreach and communication support, grants, and investments to empower leaders and their ideas…

Environment
5
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
6
Cascade Climate Inc

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

Environment
7
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
8
Work on Climate

Supporting industry transformation towards climate-positive and make green careers transitions and driving the adoption of green workforce development practices broadly.

Environment
9
Climate Catalyst Inc

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

Environment
10
Cdp North America Inc

Cdp north america, inc. 's ("cdp-na") vision for the future is a thriving economy that works for people and planet in the long term. we focus investors and companies on taking urgent action to build a truly sustainable economy by measuring…

Environment
11
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
12
The Breakthrough Institute

The Breakthrough Institute is a research center that identifies and promotes technological solutions to environmental and human development challenges.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mongabay Org Corp; the most unlike its peers is Tech for Change. 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

31 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 31 of the 57 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
30/31
Grantees still filing
16/31
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

OREGON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL (OEC): $150,750 · OtherOREGON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL (OEC)YALE UNIVERSITY: $145,098 · OtherYALE UNIVERSITYIndividual grant recipient: $99,623 · OtherIndividual grant recipientUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON - FRIDAY HARBOR LABS: $84,746 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON - FRIDAY HARBOR LAB…SOUTHEAST COASTAL OCEAN OBSERVING REGIONAL ASSOCIATION (SECOORA)(FOR SCDRP): $73,150 · OtherSOCIAL GOOD FUND (FOR AMERICA ADAPTS): $58,425 · OtherLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS - CHISPA AZ: $57,000 · OtherYALE PROGRAM ON CLIMATE CHANGE COMMUNICATION (YPCCC): $51,862 · OtherTHE URBAN INSTITUTE: $95,000 · OtherTHE URBAN INSTITUTENATIONAL COUNCIL FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH: $71,250 · Other+24 more: $645,144 · Other+24 moreCONSERVATION BIOLOGY INSTITUTE: $236,650 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION BIOLOGY INSTIT…Grist Magazine Inc: $195,469 · EnvironmentGrist Magazine IncEcoAdapt: $171,250 · EnvironmentEcoAdaptGOODPOWER INC: $75,000 · EnvironmentGOODPOWER INCGOODPOWER EDUCATION FUND INC: $71,250 · EnvironmentGOODPOWER EDUCATION FUND IN…MONGABAY ORG CORP: $71,250 · EnvironmentMONGABAY ORG CORPENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $71,249 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND …URBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK: $49,500 · Environment+2 more: $10,209 · EnvironmentUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $189,744 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF …THE CONVERSATION US INC: $182,000 · EducationTHE CONVERSATI…NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $95,000 · EducationNORTHERN ARIZO…Massachusetts Institute of Technology: $27,550 · EducationMassachusetts …CLIMATE CENTRAL INC: $290,000 · Science & TechCLIMATE CE…Climate Foundation: $85,500 · Science & TechClimate Fo…WGBH Educational Foundation: $123,500 · Arts & CultureGREATER WASHINGTON EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION INC: $71,250 · Arts & CultureUTAH FILM CENTER: $71,250 · Arts & CultureFOUNDATION FOR WATER AND ENERGY EDUCATION: $28,750 · Arts & CultureMontana Health Professionals for a Healthly Climate: $76,835 · Public BenefitTECH FOR CHANGE: $71,250 · Public BenefitPOINT REYES BIRD OBSERVATORY: $97,500 · Animals
Other$1,532,048Environment$951,827Education$494,294Science & Tech$375,500Arts & Culture$294,750Public Benefit$148,085Animals$97,500

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 budgetCLIMATE CENTRAL INC: $290,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetCONSERVATION BIOLOGY INSTITUTE: $236,650 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetGrist Magazine Inc: $195,469 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $189,744 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CONVERSATION US INC: $182,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetEcoAdapt: $171,250 over 4y, 2.6% of budgetWGBH Educational Foundation: $123,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPOINT REYES BIRD OBSERVATORY: $97,500 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetNORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $95,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetClimate Foundation: $85,500 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetMontana Health Professionals for a Healthly Climate: $76,835 over 3y, 23% of budgetGOODPOWER INC: $75,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetTECH FOR CHANGE: $71,250 over 1y, 43% of budgetGOODPOWER EDUCATION FUND INC: $71,250 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetNATIONAL COUNCIL FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH: $71,250 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetGREATER WASHINGTON EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION INC: $71,250 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUTAH FILM CENTER: $71,250 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $71,249 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPREVENTABLE SURPRISES INC: $50,000 over 2y, 22% of budgetURBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK: $49,500 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetAFFILIATED TRIBES OF NORTHWEST INDIANS: $46,012 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetZERO FOODPRINT: $45,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetINQUIRING SYSTEMS INC: $32,830 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR WATER AND ENERGY EDUCATION: $28,750 over 2y, 18% of budgetMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $27,550 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNature Forward: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMETHOW VALLEY CITIZENS COUNCIL: $10,000 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetEarthGen Fka WA Green Schools: $209 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.

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.

The Bullitt FoundationResources Legacy FundGreater Washington Co…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Bullitt FoundationWA13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bullitt Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · Greater Washington Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Co2 Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Co2 Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 9%
  • Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians: 10% of income from government
  • Conservation Biology Institute: 9% of income from government
  • Wgbh Educational Foundation: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
4report 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Co2 Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Co2 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 57 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Co2’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