· Public charity
Earthshare
EARTHSHARE provides individuals, businesses, and nonprofits with inspiration and tools to work together for a just and sustainable world.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 40 grants below total $2,164,062 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $5,542,244 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $3,378,182 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 $10k18 grants · $132k
- $10k–50k17 grants · $370k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $387k
- $250k+2 grants · $1.3M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| VERMONT SCHOOL OF LAW | $1,000,000 |
| ANIMAL CHARITY EVALUATORS | $275,000 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVANCY | $201,492 |
| WORLD WILDLIFE FUND | $117,440 |
| NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL | $67,874 |
| SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION | $43,015 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND | $40,969 |
| NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION | $37,225 |
| NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION | $29,588 |
| UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS | $24,274 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVANCY PENNSYLVANIA | $23,200 |
| OREGON PARKS FOREVER | $22,366 |
| NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY | $20,770 |
| EARTHJUSTICE | $18,421 |
| SURFRIDER FOUNDATION | $16,272 |
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 65% of your 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 +59% since the first grant, against +35% for the ones you funded once.
52 repeat relationships — 31 still active in FY2025, 21 since wound down; 5 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, 31% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.3M 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
WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC9× · 2017–2025 · $1.7M · revenue +62%
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC9× · 2017–2025 · $856k · revenue +41%
NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION9× · 2017–2025 · $548k · revenue +51%
Funded once
RAILS TO TRAILS CONSERVANCYgraduated2× · 2017–2018 · $123k · revenue +35%
THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATIONgraduated2× · 2017–2018 · $109k · revenue +59%- CEChildren's Environmental Health Networkgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $35k · revenue +35%
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.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.
Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…
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 national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.
The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
The foundation works with diverse groups representing many interests to acquire and restore critical wildlife habitat and protecting species
We bring science, policy, and proven solutions directly to communities working to restore the integrity and natural connectivity of the landscapes in which they live. (see schedule o)
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Cool Earth Action Usa Inc. 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 42 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% 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.
81 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 81 of the 84 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 THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION ↗
- Who funds AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds OCEAN CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL CHARITY EVALUATORS ↗
- Who funds Defenders of Wildlife ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds THE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds BAT CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds THE PEREGRINE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds RAINFOREST ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds RAILS TO TRAILS CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE EARTH ↗
- Who funds THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds OCEANA INC ↗
- Who funds American Forests ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY STUDY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds CLEAN WATER FUND ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN RIVERS INC ↗
- Who funds THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FARMLAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION ↗
- Who funds THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENT NEXT INC ↗
- Who funds Conservation Nation ↗
- Who funds Beyond Pesticides ↗
- Who funds ICE AGE TRAIL ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds Wildlife Conservation Society ↗
- Who funds Environmental Law Institute ↗
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: Earthshare Chapters Inc · Walton Family Foundation Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · California Community Foundation · New Venture Fund · Foundation for the Carolinas · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Ibm International Foundation · Network for Good · Shell USA Company 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 Earthshare 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.
- Xerces Society Inc — 22% of income from government
- Avalonia Land Conservancy Inc — 21% of income from government
- Gather New Haven Inc (Formely New Haven Land Trust Inc) — 11% of income from government
- National Aquarium Inc — 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.