· Private foundation
Earth Day Texas Inc
EARTH DAY TEXAS, INC.
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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN | $5,345 |
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 (FY21–21, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 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.
6 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 1 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, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
- EIEARTHXINSTITUTE INCORPORATED2× · 2021–2022 · $360k · revenue -100% · 72% of their budget
- UOUNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AUSTIN2× · 2021–2023 · $230k
- UOUNIVERSITY OF TEXAS2× · 2018–2020 · $110k
Funded once
- XPX PRIZE FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $60k · revenue +96%
- LCLand Conservation Assistance Networkone grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue +10%
- EDEARTH DAY INTERNATIONAL FILM AND MEDIAone grant, 2020 · $44k · revenue 0%
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.
To launch breakthrough climate mitigation efforts by identifying, supporting, and unleashing innovative leaders with transformative strategies.
The Breakthrough Institute is a research center that identifies and promotes technological solutions to environmental and human development challenges.
Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.
To improve the efficacy, speed, cost, sustainability, and scaling of conservation solutions through harnessing exponential technology, innovation, and entrepreneurship to prevent human-induced extinction.
Working with our world-class network of innovators, business and industry leaders, and policy experts, we accelerate the innovation of climate technologies at every stage - from discovery to development to deployment.
To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.
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 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…
Terraset uses philanthropic capital to purchase permanent, high-quality carbon removal. we pool donations from individuals, foundations, family offices, and donor advised funds, and make strategic purchases of high-quality carbon removal…
Cgc operates as a nonprofit financial institution that invests directly and through partners to transform financial markets by using public and private investing to accelerate the deployment of projects that strengthen the grid, reduce…
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…
To facilitate research and development within the texas a&m university system and selected other entities.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Earth Day International Film and Media and the most unlike its peers is Citylab Hs Foundation. 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 14 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 26% startups (under 5 years old) — 15% of your grantees by number, and just 49% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 15% 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.
20 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. 20 of the 36 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 EARTHXINSTITUTE INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC ↗
- Who funds X PRIZE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Land Conservation Assistance Network ↗
- Who funds AREI INC ↗
- Who funds EARTH DAY INTERNATIONAL FILM AND MEDIA ↗
- Who funds Dallas Museum of Art ↗
- Who funds CITYLAB HS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AFRICAN COMMUNITY AND CONSERVATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds BLUE PLANET ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds CONCORDIA SUMMIT INC ↗
- Who funds DALLAS SOCIAL VENTURE PARTNERS ↗
- Who funds BIG THOUGHT ↗
- Who funds CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE ENERGY SOLUTIONS FORUM ↗
- Who funds BRIDGE STEPS ↗
- Who funds FOR OAK CLIFF ↗
- Who funds Texas A&M Foundation ↗
- Who funds TALKSTEM ↗
- Who funds EXPANDING FRONTIERS CORP ↗
- Who funds VETERINARY CARE FOUNDATION INCORPORATED ↗
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: Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Texas Women's Foundation · Texas Instruments Foundation · The Dallas Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · National Philanthropic Trust · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc
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 Earth Day Texas 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.