· Public charity
Conservative Energy Network
To champion secure, reliable, affordable, clean American energy.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $50k–250k7 grants · $1.1M
- $250k+3 grants · $1.4M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Conservatives for Clean Energy | $592,000 |
| The Western Way | $415,000 |
| Conservative Texans for Energy Innovation | $373,321 |
| Ohio Conservative Energy Forum | $210,361 |
| Minnesota Conservative Energy Forum | $209,690 |
| Michigan Conservative Energy Forum | $205,040 |
| Iowa Conservative Energy Forum | $135,500 |
| Indiana Conservative Alliance | $129,079 |
| Wisconsin Conservative Energy Forum | $123,738 |
| Pennsylvania Conservative Energy Forum | $55,846 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY18–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 48% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
12 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down.
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 FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- CFCONSERVATIVES FOR CLEAN ENERGY INC7× · 2018–2024 · $4.9M · revenue +181% · 89% of their budget
- MCMINNESOTA CONSERVATIVE ENERGY FORUM8× · 2017–2024 · $1.3M · revenue +10% · 89% of their budget
- ALAMERICAN LEGISLATIVE EXCHANGE COUNCIL2× · 2017–2019 · $27k · revenue +37%
Funded once
- JRJOSEPH RAINEY CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICYgraduated2× · 2018–2019 · $135k · revenue +920% · 53% of their budget
- TUTHE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION NO 1graduatedone grant, 2020 · $63k · revenue ×194,726
- CFCITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE ENERGY SOLUTIONS FORUMgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $50k · revenue +99%
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.
CCEF works with policymakers and stakeholders across the nation to promote policies that secure affordable, reliable, and increasingly efficient and clean energy. Commonsense, market-driven energy policies will create local jobs, spark…
To champion secure, reliable, affordable, clean American energy.
Our mission is to strengthen and sustain our global environment for future generations by expanding economic freedom and accelerating free enterprise innovation.
Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.
To provide californians with accurate, science-based information about energy and climate issues, enabling informed decision-making for our state's energy future. we believe that through education and transparent research, we can help…
The California Energy Alliance (CEA) unites representatives of a broad range of organizations concerned about energy and the build environment. As a member-based organization, CEA works to improve California's energy future and migration…
Researching policy ideas on climate and clean energy in India, engaging legislators and business leaders to discuss those ideas.
The NW Energy Coalition is an alliance of over 100 environmental, civic, and human service organizations, utilities, and businesses in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia, plus many individual members. The NW Energy…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions Forum and the most unlike its peers is The Western Way Organization. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
15 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. 15 of the 17 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 CONSERVATIVES FOR CLEAN ENERGY INC ↗
- Who funds The Western Way Organization ↗
- Who funds OHIO CONSERVATIVE ENERGY FORUM ATTN TONY ZARTMAN ↗
- Who funds MINNESOTA CONSERVATIVE ENERGY FORUM ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN CONSERVATIVE ENERGY FORUM ↗
- Who funds Pennsylvania Conservative Energy Forum ↗
- Who funds Wisconsin Conservative Energy Forum Inc ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATIVE TEXANS FOR ENERGY INNOVATION ↗
- Who funds EARTH STEWARDSHIP ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds JOSEPH RAINEY CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY ↗
- Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION NO 1 ↗
- Who funds CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE ENERGY SOLUTIONS FORUM ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN LEGISLATIVE EXCHANGE COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds THE REASON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CONSERVATION COALITION 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: The Energy Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · Conservatives for a Clean Energy Future
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 Conservative Energy Network 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Conservative Energy Network?
Find your warmest path to Conservative Energy Network 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.