· Public charity
Conservation Law Foundation Inc
Conservation law foundation, inc.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 17 grants below total $615,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $630,750 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $15,750 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 · $8k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $158k
- $50k–250k8 grants · $450k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ALTERNATIVES FOR COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENT | $80,000 |
| PUBLIC HEALTH INSTITUTE OF WESTERN MA | $58,750 |
| GREEN ROOTS INC | $56,250 |
| GROUNDWORK LAWRENCE INC | $53,500 |
| HILLTOWN CDC | $51,250 |
| COALITION FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE EDUCATION FUND INC | $50,000 |
| NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR MASSACHUSETTS EDUCATION FUND | $50,000 |
| ACT LAWRENCE | $50,000 |
| NEW ENGLAND COMMUNITY PROJECT INC | $30,000 |
| LIVABLE STREETS ALLIANCE | $23,750 |
| BOSTON CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING INC | $22,000 |
| THE FOOD BANK OF WESTERN MASSACHUSETTS INC | $21,250 |
| TSNE MISSIONWORKS | $20,000 |
| MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION | $17,500 |
| WALKMASSACHUSETTS | $12,250 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY24–25, $32k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +53% since the first grant, against +46% for the ones you funded once.
9 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 23% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $474k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- ALAMERICAN LITTORAL SOCIETY2× · 2019–2020 · $377k · revenue +129%
- AFALTERNATIVES FOR COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENT INC2× · 2024–2025 · $117k · revenue +6%
EARTHJUSTICE3× · 2021–2024 · $112k · revenue +49%
Funded once
- NHNEW HAMPSHIRE RIVERS COUNCILgraduatedone grant, 2024 · $225k · revenue +42%
- TITRANSITMATTERS INCone grant, 2022 · $35k
LAWRENCE COMMUNITYWORKS INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $30k · revenue +46%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Conservation law foundation, inc. (clf) protects new england's environment for the benefit of all people and future generations. we use the law, science, and markets to create solutions that preserve and restore our natural resources,…
The organization's mission is to advocate for policy that meets the scale and urgency of our environmental challenges. as a massachusetts-based organization that engages in advocacy across a full spectrum of climate, environmental, and…
Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.
The chinatown community land trust (chinatown clt) works to stabilize the future of chinatown as a neighborhood for working class families and a regional hub for the chinese community. we work for community control of the land, development…
We seek to facilitate a just energy transition by putting black and brown communities first, and enabling systems change at the intersection of social, environmental, and economic justice. we are powering a just energy transition in the…
To protect the nature of massachusetts for people and for wildlife through education, land conservation, advocacy, scientific research, and habitat stewardship/restoration.
The southwest boston community development corporation is led by principles of racial equity and inclusion, to alleviate social and economic disparities that impact people's quality of life and future opportunities. it shall be led by and…
Working with our related organization, a better city, inc., we promote the economic growth and enhance the quality of life in the city of boston, boston metropolitan region, and other urban areas, by participating in the planning and…
The alliance is a coalition of community-based organizations and advocacy groups with a mission to build power across the intersections of geography, race, culture, and issues in the twin cities region to eliminate systems of oppression…
See attached schedule othe conservancy has sole responsibility for managing all aspects of the rose kennedy greenway, including horticulture, programming, public art, maintenance, and capital improvements. we envision a vibrant, inclusive,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Greenroots Inc and the most unlike its peers is American Littoral Society. 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.
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 32 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) — 9% of your grantees by number, and just 7% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
29 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. 29 of the 37 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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.
- Who funds AMERICAN LITTORAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds NEW HAMPSHIRE RIVERS COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds ALTERNATIVES FOR COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENT INC ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Groundwork Lawrence Inc ↗
- Who funds RACIAL ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE COMMITTEE ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS FOR A HEALTHIER COMMUNITY INC ↗
- Who funds GREENROOTS INC ↗
- Who funds HILLTOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds ACT LAWRENCE INC ↗
- Who funds NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR MASSACHUSETTS EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds COALITION FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Massachusetts Institute of Technology ↗
- Who funds PRESERVATION TRUST OF VERMONT INC ↗
- Who funds NEW ENGLAND COMMUNITY PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds LAWRENCE COMMUNITYWORKS INC ↗
- Who funds LIVABLE STREETS TRANSPORTATION ALLIANCE OF BOSTON INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL BUSINESS COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds BOSTON CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING INC ↗
- Who funds THE FOOD BANK OF WESTERN MASSACHUSETTS INC ↗
- Who funds THIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC ↗
- Who funds MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds KNOX INC ↗
- Who funds RE GREEN SPRINGFIELD INC ↗
- Who funds WALKBOSTON INC ↗
- Who funds KENEY PARK SUSTAINABILITY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds MASSACHUSETTS BICYCLE COALITION INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds PARTNERSHIP FOR A HEALTHIER COMMUNITY INC ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Boston Foundation Inc · Barr Foundation · Point32health Foundation Inc · Eastern Bank Foundation · Health Resources in Action Inc · United Way Of Massachusetts Bay Inc · Mass General Brigham Incorporated & Affiliates Group Return · Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center Inc · Lawrence & Lillian Solomon Foundation Inc · Clean Water Fund · Herman and Frieda L Miller 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 Law Foundation Inc 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Act Lawrence Inc — 44% of income from government
- Keney Park Sustainability Project — 37% of income from government
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology — 35% of income from government
- Preservation Trust of Vermont Inc — 29% of income from government
- Partners for a Healthier Community Inc — 11% of income from government
- Lawrence Communityworks Inc — 9% of income from government
- Third Sector New England Inc — 3% of income from government
- Knox Inc — 2% of income from government
- Greenroots Inc — 1% of income from government
- American Littoral Society — 1% of income from government
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.