· Public charity
Dogwood Alliance Inc
Dogwood Alliance advances environmental justice and climate action by mobilizing diverse voices to protect southern forests and communities from industrial logging.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 12 grants below total $232,500 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $265,162 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $32,662 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 · FY2024
- $10k–50k11 grants · $153k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $80k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| New Alpha Community Development | $80,000 |
| Georgia Interfaith Power and Light | $27,500 |
| EEECHO | $20,000 |
| KMartin Group | $20,000 |
| Pee Dee Indian Tribe | $15,000 |
| Blackbelt Women Rising | $10,000 |
| Cultivator Inc | $10,000 |
| Gaston Youth | $10,000 |
| Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League | $10,000 |
| The People's Justice Council | $10,000 |
| Southern Vision Alliance | $10,000 |
| Lower Eastern Cherokee Nation SC | $10,000 |
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 (FY20–24, $65k) land where the poverty rate runs at 30%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 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.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 12% of Dogwood Alliance Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +54% since the first grant, against -2% for the ones you funded once.
11 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k 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
- NANEW ALPHA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION7× · 2018–2024 · $304k · revenue +54%
- GIGeorgia Interfaith Power & Light Inc5× · 2020–2024 · $105k · revenue +217%
- PJPEOPLE'S JUSTICE COUNCIL5× · 2020–2024 · $65k · revenue +372%
Funded once
- MRMISSISSIPPI RISING COALITIONone grant, 2022 · $8k · revenue -71%
- SNSol Nation Incone grant, 2022 · $7k · revenue -2%
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.
Environmental Justice & Equality
We are a grassroots organization whose primary purpose is to raise awareness about climate change, educate the public, and advocate for sound climate policy and climate action plans at the local level. We work with local municipalities to…
NC has clean & safe air, water & soil.
environmental education
Educational activities to promote environmental justice.
New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance, Inc. Is an alliance of New Jersey Organizations and Individuals committed to creating healthy, sustainable and just communities by eliminating environmental injustices in low income and…
To support communities use of grassroots action in order to create sustainable neighborhoods free from industrial pollution.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New Alpha Community Development Corporation and the most unlike its peers is People's Justice Council. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
14 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. 14 of the 15 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 NEW ALPHA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds Georgia Interfaith Power & Light Inc ↗
- Who funds EDUCATION ECONOMICS ENVIRONMENTAL CLIMATE AND HEAL ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE'S JUSTICE COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds PEE DEE INDIAN TRIBE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ↗
- Who funds KMARTIN GROUP ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN VISION ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League ↗
- Who funds CULTIVATOR INC ↗
- Who funds NC WARN INC ↗
- Who funds BLACKBELT WOMEN RISING INC ↗
- Who funds PAIA LOWER EASTERN CHEROKEE NATION ↗
- Who funds MISSISSIPPI RISING COALITION ↗
- Who funds Sol Nation 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: Windward Fund · Solutions Project Inc · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · Common Counsel Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · US Climate Action Network · Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated · Tides Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · Amazonsmile 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 Dogwood Alliance 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 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.