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

· Public charity

Earthjustice

EARTHJUSTICE is a premier nonprofit public interest environmental law organization.

$6.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$3.9M
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$11MPhilanthropy$4.0MCrime & Legal$610kInternational$100kCivil Rights$29kArts & Culture$15kFood & Nutrition$10kRecreation & Sports$10k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 9 grants below total $5,755,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $6,182,778 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $427,778 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

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $40k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $565k
  • $250k+3 grants · $5.2M
$150,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$316M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EARTHJUSTICE ACTION$3,900,000
TIDES FOUNDATION$1,000,000
CENTER FOR EARTH ENERGY AND DEMOCRACY$250,000
ASOCIACION INTERAMERICANA PARA LA DEFENSA DEL AMBIENTE (AIDA)$175,000
SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS INC$150,000
THE PARTNERSHIP PROJECT INC$125,000
GREENLATINOS$65,000
COMING CLEAN INC$50,000
HARAMBEE HOUSE INC$40,000
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 (FY20–25, $185k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, 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.

area typical 11%HARAMBEE HOUSE INC: $55k → 16%HARAMBEE HOUSE INC: $50k → 16%HARAMBEE HOUSE INC: $40k → 16%HARAMBEE HOUSE INC: $40k → 16%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

VT
MT
MN
NY
MA
NJ
CA
UT
CO
MD
DC
GA

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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 86% of Earthjustice’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. Read by recipient address, 50% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 9% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Earthjusticelessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

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.

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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$12M · 15 repeat orgs$432k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +99% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.

15 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
17

Total granted

$12M
$432k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+99%
+25%

Still filing today

93%
100%

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
EnvironmentCivil RightsEducationInternationalCrime & LegalHuman ServicesOther

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

  • EA
    EARTHJUSTICE ACTION
    7× · 2019–2025 · $4.9M · revenue ×20 · 61% of their budget
  • SA
    SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $3.0M · revenue +156%
  • The Partnership Project Inc
    6× · 2017–2025 · $1.2M · revenue +35%

Funded once

  • OC
    OCCIDENTAL COLLEGE
    one grant, 2020 · $65k · revenue +25%
  • LO
    LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +136%
  • NB
    National Black Caucus of State Legislatorsgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue +64%

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
California Environmental Justice Alliance

Our mission is to fight against fossil fuel executives and industries that have turned our communities into dumping grounds for toxic waste, poisoning our air, water, lan, and bodies. We organize to oppose giant oil refineries, dirty…

Environment
2
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators

The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.

Education
3
Environmental Law and Policy Center of the Midwest

The environmental law & policy center (elpc) is the midwest's leading public interest environmental legal advocacy and ecobusiness innovation organization, and among the nation's leaders. we develop and lead successful strategic…

Environment
4
Environment Now
—
5
International Council On Environmental Economics and Development Union
Human Services
6
Federation of State Conservation Voter Leagues Dba Nj League of Cons Voters

New jersey lcv is the statewide political voice for the environment. working with our allies in the community, we advocate for strong environmental policies, support our environmental justice partners in pursuing more equitable policies,…

—
7
Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide

Educational & charitable. to provide legal and scientific information to public interest attorneys and scientists in numerous countries.

—
8
Nature for Justice

To empower frontline communities to lead nature-based solutions that advance climate justice, ecosystem restoration, and resilient livelihoods through connecting locally-led initiatives to funding, markets, and technical support.

Environment
9
E3G Third Generation Environmentalism

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
10
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
11
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
12
Environmental League of Massachusetts Inc

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…

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc and the most unlike its peers is New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance. 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 backsteadyUrban Agriculture & Food Ac…Environmental Advocacy Orga…Land Conservation Organizat…Legal Aid & Immigration Ser…Affordable Housing Developm…Faith-Based Liberal Arts Co…
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 31 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number24%0%<5yr15%10%5–10yr20%19%10–20yr17%29%20–35yr11%32%35–55yr13%10%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value24%0%<5yr15%34%5–10yr20%4%10–20yr17%25%20–35yr11%36%35–55yr13%1%55yr+

The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% 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 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/34
the rest of the field
14%
26,003/186,944

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.

05the grantee network

33 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. 33 of the 34 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
13
Early backer (in before they grew)
33/33
Grantees still filing
22/33
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

EARTHJUSTICE ACTION — $4,900,000 · EnvironmentEARTHJUSTICE ACTIONSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC — $2,970,000 · EnvironmentSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INCThe Partnership Project Inc — $1,244,500 · EnvironmentThe Partnership Project IncCENTER FOR EARTH ENERGY AND DEMOCRACY — $400,000 · Environment+10 more — $851,050 · Environment+10 moreTIDES CENTER — $2,050,000 · Human ServicesTIDES CENTERHarambee House Inc — $185,000 · Human ServicesHarambee House …TIDES FOUNDATION — $2,000,000 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUNDATI…ASOCIACION INTERAMERICANA PARA LA DEFENSA DEL AMBIENTE — $860,000 · Crime & LegalIALA — $57,000 · OtherNational Black Caucus of State Legislators — $50,000 · OtherMOUNTAIN JOURNAL INC — $40,000 · OtherEL PUENTE DE WILLIAMSBURG INC — $30,000 · OtherSOUTH YUBA RIVER CITIZENS LEAGUE — $15,000 · OtherLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $50,000 · OtherINSTITUTE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & SOCIAL JUSTICE — $15,000 · OtherHIP HOP CAUCUS EDUCATION FUND — $50,000 · Other+5 more — $43,500 · OtherGRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC — $100,000 · InternationalOCCIDENTAL COLLEGE — $65,000 · EducationCLIMATE GENERATION — $12,600 · Education
Environment$10,365,550Human Services$2,235,000Philanthropy$2,000,000Crime & Legal$860,000Other$350,500International$100,000Education$77,600

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetEARTHJUSTICE ACTION — $4,900,000 over 7y, 61% of budgetSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC — $2,970,000 over 6y, 1.4% of budgetTIDES CENTER — $2,050,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION — $2,000,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetThe Partnership Project Inc — $1,244,500 over 6y, 1.2% of budgetASOCIACION INTERAMERICANA PARA LA DEFENSA DEL AMBIENTE — $860,000 over 6y, 8.9% of budgetCENTER FOR EARTH ENERGY AND DEMOCRACY — $400,000 over 3y, 15% of budgetCOMING CLEAN INC — $290,000 over 6y, 5.6% of budgetHarambee House Inc — $185,000 over 4y, 9.1% of budgetALASKA WILDERNESS LEAGUE — $150,000 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetGREENFAITH INC — $120,000 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetGRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC — $100,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetGreenLatinos — $87,500 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION — $80,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetOCCIDENTAL COLLEGE — $65,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHIP HOP CAUCUS EDUCATION FUND — $50,000 over 2y, 5.1% of budgetNational Black Caucus of State Legislators — $50,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetGreen 20 — $40,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetEL PUENTE DE WILLIAMSBURG INC — $30,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetINSTITUTE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & SOCIAL JUSTICE — $15,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetSOUTH YUBA RIVER CITIZENS LEAGUE — $15,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC — $12,900 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCLIMATE GENERATION — $12,600 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND — $10,650 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNational Parks Traveler — $10,000 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetSOCIETY OF ENVIRONMENTAL JOURNALISTS INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetNATIONAL YOUNG FARMERS COALITION INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE ENVIRONMENTAL MEDIA ASSOCIATIONINC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetALLIANCE FOR JUSTICE — $7,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ON CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS INC — $6,000 over 1y, 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.

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.

Natural Resources Def…PatagoniaorgSierra ClubUnited States Energy …Tides FoundationThe Partnership Proje…Rockefeller Family Fu…Resources Legacy FundAmalgamated Charitabl…Windward FundThe Wilderness SocietyNew Venture Fund
Natural Resources Defense Council IncNY32× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · Patagoniaorg · Sierra Club · United States Energy Foundation · Tides Foundation · The Partnership Project Inc · Rockefeller Family Fund Inc · Resources Legacy Fund · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Windward Fund · The Wilderness Society · New Venture Fund

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 Earthjustice 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 · 30%5%19%42%75%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 39%
  • New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance — 39% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
3report 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 34 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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines