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

· Public charity

Conservation Lands Foundation

To protect, restore, and expand the National Conservation Lands through education,advocacy, and partnerships.

$2.7M
Granted FY2025still arriving
53
Grants FY2025still arriving
12
States reached
$410k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
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 FY2017–2025.

Environment$14MArts & Culture$804kHuman Services$475kRecreation & Sports$221kAnimals$120kYouth Development$30k
02FY2025 · 53 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 53 grants below total $2,516,500 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $2,654,784 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $138,284 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k34 grants · $657k
  • $50k–250k17 grants · $1.4M
  • $250k+1 grant · $410k
$25,000
Median grant
12
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Mojave Desert Land Trust$410,000
Transition Habitat Conservancy$225,000
Friends of the Inyo$155,000
Friends of the Desert Mountains$110,500
New Mexico Wilderness Alliance$108,500
CactusToCloud Institute$84,000
Friends of the Owyhee$83,500
Archaeology Southwest$80,000
Friends of Big Morongo Canyon Preserve$71,500
Friends of the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks$70,000
Bears Ears Partnership$70,000
Dolores River Boating Advocates$70,000
Conserve Southwest Utah$60,000
Get Outdoors Nevada$55,000
Native American Land Conservancy$50,000
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:

Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $773k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 96% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Consejo de Federaciones Mexicanas en Norte America: $33k → 14%CONSEJO DE FEDERACIONES MEXICANAS: $25k → 14%Birds of Prey NCA Partnership: $20k → 8%COFEM: $20k → 14%Birds of Prey NCA Partnership: $10k → 8%Council of Mexican Federation: $20k → 14%Consejo de Federaciones Mexicanas en Norte America: $20k → 14%CONSEJO DE FEDERACIONES MEXICANAS: $20k → 14%TEWA WOMEN UNITED: $10k → 12%COFEM: $10k → 14%TOGETHER WE CAN: $10k → 13%Council of Mexican Federation: $10k → 14%Consejo de Federaciones Mexicanas en Norte America: $10k → 14%Together We Can: $10k → 13%Together We Can: $10k → 13%OUTSIDE LAS VEGAS FOUNDATION: $80k → 13%Get Outdoors Nevada: $65k → 13%OUTSIDE LAS VEGAS FOUNDATION: $65k → 13%Outside Las Vegas Foundation: $60k → 13%Get Outdoors Nevada: $60k → 13%Get Outdoors Nevada: $60k → 13%Get Outdoors Nevada: $55k → 13%Outside Las Vegas Foundation: $45k → 13%Outside Las Vegas Foundation: $45k → 13%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

AK
WA
ID
MT
NY
OR
NV
WY
CA
UT
CO
VA
AZ
NM
SC
DC
OK
TX

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.

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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$16M · 83 repeat orgs$370k to everyone else

83 repeat relationships — 53 still active in FY2025, 30 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

83
23

Total granted

$16M
$370k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
+72%

Still filing today

87%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentAnimalsCommunity ImprovementArts & CultureOther

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

  • TC
    THE CALIFORNIA DESERT LAND CONSERVANCY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $830k · revenue +143%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF CEDAR MESA
    9× · 2017–2025 · $740k · revenue +382%
  • AS
    Archaeology Southwest
    9× · 2017–2025 · $732k · revenue +58%

Funded once

  • TR
    TOGETHER RISING AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL COMMUNITYgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $50k · revenue +43%
  • NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN THE UNITED STATESgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $35k · revenue +54%
  • PC
    Penn Center Inc
    one grant, 2017 · $30k · revenue -45%

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 Grand Canyon Trust Inc

The mission of the grand canyon trust is to safeguard the wonders of the grand canyon and the colorado plateau, while supporting the rights of its native peoples.

Environment
2
Santa Fe Forest Coalition

Educate the public on forest conservation issues in New Mexico

Environment
3
Cascadia Wildlands

Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…

Environment
4
The Jmt Wilderness Conservancy

Working to restore the watersheds, wilderness, and wildlife in the high sierra nevada following the john muir trail (est. 1915) for all life in california.

Environment
5
The Wildlands Conservancy

The Wildlands Conservancy's dual mission is to preserve the beauty and biodiversity of the earth and to provide programs so that children may know the wonder and joy of nature.

Environment
6
Rio Bravo Restoration

Natural Resource Stewardship

Environment
7
Living Rivers

Living rivers promotes river restoration through mobilization by articulating conservation and alternative management strategies to the public. seeking to revive the natural habitat and spirit of rivers by undoing the extensive damage done…

Environment
8
Volcan Mountain Foundation

The Volcan Mountain Foundation's mission is to preserve Volcan Mountain Range in its natural state for all generations.

—
9
Oregon Natural Resources Council Fund

Oregon Wild works to protect and restore Oregon's wildlands, wildlife and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations.

Environment
10
Wild Arizona

Wild Arizonas mission is to protect, unite, and restore wild lands and waters across Arizona and beyond, for the enrichment and health of all generations, and to ensure Arizona's native plants and animals a lasting home in wild nature.

Environment
11
Utah Public Lands Alliance
Education
12
Native Ecosystems Council

Promote wildlife habitat

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New Mexico Wilderness Alliance and the most unlike its peers is Conejos County Clean Water Inc. 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 backsteadyEnvironmental Conservation …Youth Development ServicesLocal Food System Organizat…Affordable Housing Developm…Youth Sports ProgramsWomen & Girls Leadership De…Health Access Advocacy and …Immigrant Worker SupportPolicy Research and AdvocacyCommunity Foundations
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 25 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%1%<5yr14%12%5–10yr19%21%10–20yr16%34%20–35yr13%24%35–55yr16%7%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%0%<5yr14%10%5–10yr19%29%10–20yr16%43%20–35yr13%16%35–55yr16%2%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/106
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,459

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

92 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. 92 of the 106 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.

13
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
40
Early backer (in before they grew)
91/92
Grantees still filing
67/92
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

THE CALIFORNIA DESERT LAND CONSERVANCY — $830,000 · EnvironmentTHE CALIFORNIA DESERT LAND CONSERVANCYFriends of the Inyo — $686,500 · EnvironmentFriends of the InyoUtah Dine Bikeyah — $685,000 · EnvironmentUtah Dine BikeyahFRIENDS OF THE ORGAN MOUNTAINS-DESERT PEAKS — $677,000 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE ORGAN MOUNTAINS-DESERT PEAKSFRIENDS OF THE OWYHEE — $615,500 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE OWYHEEDolores River Boating Advocates — $504,000 · EnvironmentDolores River Boating AdvocatesNEW MEXICO WILDERNESS ALLIANCE — $448,500 · EnvironmentNative American Land Conservancy — $425,000 · EnvironmentGRAND STAIRCASE - ESCALANTE PARTNERS INC — $412,500 · EnvironmentTULEYOME — $408,500 · EnvironmentTRANSITION HABITAT CONSERVANCY — $330,000 · EnvironmentFriends of Gold Butte — $315,000 · Environment+37 more — $2,790,500 · Environment+37 moreFRIENDS OF CEDAR MESA — $740,000 · OtherFRIENDS OF CEDAR MESAArchaeology Southwest — $731,500 · OtherArchaeology SouthwestFRIENDS OF NEVADA WILDERNESS — $310,000 · OtherFRIENDS OF NEVADA WILDERNES…OREGON NATURAL DESERT ASSOCIATION — $300,000 · OtherOREGON NATURAL DESERT ASSOC…NFRIA-WSERC CONSERVATION CENTER INC — $150,000 · OtherNATIVE MOVEMENT — $130,000 · Other+32 more — $1,448,039 · Other+32 moreOUTSIDE LAS VEGAS FOUNDATION — $535,000 · Human ServicesCONSEJO DE FEDERACIONES MEXICANAS EN NORTE AMERICA — $167,500 · Human ServicesBIRDS OF PREY NCA PARTNERSHIP — $30,000 · Human ServicesTogether We can — $30,000 · Human Services+1 more — $10,000 · Human ServicesAmargosa Land Trust — $352,000 · AnimalsFRIENDS OF THE DESERT MOUNTAINS — $234,000 · AnimalsNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION — $90,000 · AnimalsWYOMING WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION — $60,000 · AnimalsCONSERVE SOUTHWEST UTAH — $480,000 · EducationBLU Educational Foundation — $210,000 · EducationCOLORADO CANYONS ASSOCIATION — $355,000 · Recreation & SportsTRAIL ACCESS PROJECT — $65,000 · Recreation & SportsGREATER LAS VEGAS INNER CITY GAMES — $30,000 · Recreation & SportsCONSERVATION LEGACY — $238,000 · Youth DevelopmentOUTDOOR OUTREACH — $40,000 · Youth Development7G Foundation — $30,000 · Youth DevelopmentYOUNG MASTERMINDS INITIATIVE INC — $30,000 · Youth DevelopmentFRIENDS OF THE CASCADE-SISKIYOU NATIONAL MONUMENT — $22,000 · Youth Development
Environment$9,128,000Other$3,809,539Human Services$772,500Animals$736,000Education$690,000Recreation & Sports$450,000Youth Development$360,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTHE CALIFORNIA DESERT LAND CONSERVANCY — $830,000 over 9y, 3.4% of budgetFRIENDS OF CEDAR MESA — $740,000 over 9y, 15% of budgetArchaeology Southwest — $731,500 over 9y, 3.9% of budgetFriends of the Inyo — $686,500 over 9y, 17% of budgetUtah Dine Bikeyah — $685,000 over 7y, 14% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ORGAN MOUNTAINS-DESERT PEAKS — $677,000 over 9y, 54% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE OWYHEE — $615,500 over 7y, 52% of budgetOUTSIDE LAS VEGAS FOUNDATION — $535,000 over 9y, 19% of budgetDolores River Boating Advocates — $504,000 over 9y, 53% of budgetCONSERVE SOUTHWEST UTAH — $480,000 over 9y, 65% of budgetNEW MEXICO WILDERNESS ALLIANCE — $448,500 over 6y, 3.6% of budgetNative American Land Conservancy — $425,000 over 9y, 28% of budgetGRAND STAIRCASE - ESCALANTE PARTNERS INC — $412,500 over 9y, 7.2% of budgetTULEYOME — $408,500 over 9y, 16% of budgetCOLORADO CANYONS ASSOCIATION — $355,000 over 9y, 18% of budgetAmargosa Land Trust — $352,000 over 9y, 27% of budgetTRANSITION HABITAT CONSERVANCY — $330,000 over 8y, 1.8% of budgetFriends of Gold Butte — $315,000 over 9y, 42% of budgetFRIENDS OF NEVADA WILDERNESS — $310,000 over 7y, 4.0% of budgetOREGON NATURAL DESERT ASSOCIATION — $300,000 over 7y, 1.6% of budgetFRIENDS OF BIG MORONGO CANYON PRESERVE — $291,500 over 9y, 42% of budgetAmah Mutsun Land Trust — $260,000 over 8y, 5.5% of budgetCONSERVATION LEGACY — $238,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE DESERT MOUNTAINS — $234,000 over 8y, 4.0% of budgetBLU Educational Foundation — $210,000 over 7y, 13% of budgetCONEJOS COUNTY CLEAN WATER INC — $180,000 over 3y, 35% of budgetWYOMING OUTDOOR COUNCIL — $180,000 over 4y, 3.2% of budgetMATTOLE RESTORATION COUNCIL — $170,500 over 9y, 2.2% of budgetCONSEJO DE FEDERACIONES MEXICANAS EN NORTE AMERICA — $167,500 over 9y, 4.2% of budgetTrinidad Coastal Land Trust — $165,000 over 9y, 12% of budgetSAN LUIS VALLEY ECOSYSTEM COUNCIL INC — $151,500 over 7y, 32% of budgetNFRIA-WSERC CONSERVATION CENTER INC — $150,000 over 5y, 9.3% of budgetNATIVE MOVEMENT — $130,000 over 4y, 2.1% of budgetMONTANA WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION — $128,000 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE MISSOURI BREAKS MONUMENT — $125,000 over 5y, 21% of budgetNEW MEXICO WILDLIFE FEDERATION — $120,000 over 7y, 2.1% of budgetWILDERNESS WORKSHOP — $120,000 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetWESTERN CONSERVATION FOUNDATION — $120,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetCACTUSTOCLOUD INSTITUTE — $94,000 over 2y, 63% of budgetFriends of the Amargosa Basin — $92,000 over 4y, 22% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION — $90,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCARRIZO PLAIN CONSERVANCY — $90,000 over 9y, 34% of budgetUPPER GILA WATERSHED ALLIANCE — $90,000 over 7y, 15% of budgetINDIGENOUS VOICES NEVADA — $85,000 over 4y, 10% of budgetFriends of the Lost Coast — $73,000 over 7y, 22% of budgetTHE ALASKA CENTER EDUCATION FUND — $70,000 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetTRAIL ACCESS PROJECT — $65,000 over 4y, 18% of budgetGREAT BASIN INSTITUTE — $60,000 over 2y, 0.2% 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.

  • Who funds THE CALIFORNIA DESERT LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF CEDAR MESA ↗
  • Who funds Archaeology Southwest ↗
  • Who funds Friends of the Inyo ↗
  • Who funds Utah Dine Bikeyah ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ORGAN MOUNTAINS-DESERT PEAKS ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE OWYHEE ↗
  • Who funds OUTSIDE LAS VEGAS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Dolores River Boating Advocates ↗
  • Who funds CONSERVE SOUTHWEST UTAH ↗
  • Who funds NEW MEXICO WILDERNESS ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds Native American Land Conservancy ↗
  • Who funds GRAND STAIRCASE - ESCALANTE PARTNERS INC ↗
  • Who funds TULEYOME ↗
  • Who funds COLORADO CANYONS ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds Amargosa Land Trust ↗
  • Who funds TRANSITION HABITAT CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds Friends of Gold Butte ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF NEVADA WILDERNESS ↗
  • Who funds OREGON NATURAL DESERT ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF BIG MORONGO CANYON PRESERVE ↗
  • Who funds Amah Mutsun Land Trust ↗
  • Who funds CONSERVATION LEGACY ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE DESERT MOUNTAINS ↗
  • Who funds BLU Educational Foundation ↗
  • Who funds CONEJOS COUNTY CLEAN WATER INC ↗
  • Who funds WYOMING OUTDOOR COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds MATTOLE RESTORATION COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds CONSEJO DE FEDERACIONES MEXICANAS EN NORTE AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds Trinidad Coastal Land Trust ↗
  • Who funds SAN LUIS VALLEY ECOSYSTEM COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds NFRIA-WSERC CONSERVATION CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIVE MOVEMENT ↗
  • Who funds MONTANA WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE MISSOURI BREAKS MONUMENT ↗
  • Who funds NEW MEXICO WILDLIFE FEDERATION ↗
  • Who funds WILDERNESS WORKSHOP ↗
  • Who funds WESTERN CONSERVATION FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds CACTUSTOCLOUD INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds Friends of the Amargosa Basin ↗

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.

Resources Legacy FundPatagoniaorgThe Wilderness SocietyWestern Conservation …National Forest Found…The Pew Charitable Tr…Wilburforce FoundationNational Fish and Wil…Wyss FoundationThe New-Land Foundati…Maki FoundationNational Park Foundat…
Resources Legacy FundCA73.9× affinity37 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Resources Legacy Fund · Patagoniaorg · The Wilderness Society · Western Conservation Foundation · National Forest Foundation · The Pew Charitable Trusts · Wilburforce Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Wyss Foundation · The New-Land Foundation Inc · Maki Foundation · National Park 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 organization Conservation Lands 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 · 40%6%23%51%90%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 13%
  • Friends of the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument — 13% of income from government
  • Oregon Natural Desert Association — 9% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
21report 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

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.

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 106 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 2025, released 2025. 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 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