· Public charity
Earthshare Chapters Inc
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 7 grants below total $57,144 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $168,447 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $111,303 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 $10k6 grants · $46k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $11k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| EARTHSHARE WASHINGTON | $10,983 |
| ANACOSTIA WATERSHED SOCIETY | $9,706 |
| OYSTER RECOVERY PARTNERSHIP | $9,651 |
| OWL MOON RAPTOR CENTER | $7,601 |
| POTOMAC RIVERKEEPER NETWORK | $6,945 |
| AMERICAN CHESTNUT LAND TRUST | $6,684 |
| ROCK CREEK CONSERVANCY | $5,574 |
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 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 42% 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +35% since the first grant, against +9% for the ones you funded once.
41 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 35 since wound down; 1 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, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k 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
- CCC&O CANAL TRUST INC4× · 2017–2020 · $76k · revenue +59%
- ENEARTHSHARE NEW JERSEY INC5× · 2017–2022 · $71k · revenue +54%
- OROYSTER RECOVERY PARTNERSHIP INC9× · 2017–2025 · $68k · revenue +20%
Funded once
- ECEARTHSHARE CHAPTERS INCone grant, 2017 · $271k · revenue -87%
- EIEARTHSHARE ILLINOIS - CHAPTERone grant, 2017 · $28k
RAILS TO TRAILS CONSERVANCYgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $23k · 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.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
Our mission is to enrich the lives of all people in northeast ohio by conserving natural habitats, restoring the ecological value of our region's lands and waters, and expanding opportunities to connect people from all cultures to…
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.
Earth conservancy is a nonprofit organization committed to the reclamation and return of over 16,000 acres of former coal company-owned land to the region. it collaborates with local communities, government agencies, education…
It is our mission at huron pines to conserve and enhance northern michigan's natural resources to ensure healthy water, protected places and vibrant communities. for alomst 50 years, our work across the forests, lakes and streams of…
Recognizing that a healthy environment is critical to the well-being and survival of all living things, new jersey conservation foundation is devoted to preserving land and protecting natural resources throughout new jersey's (continued on…
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…
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)
The foundation works with diverse groups representing many interests to acquire and restore critical wildlife habitat and protecting species
To advance conservation governance through political will and to provide "on the ground" solutions to ensure sustained economic benefits while managing the earth's natural resource wealth for future generations.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environmental Federation of North Carolina Inc Dba Earthshare Nc and the most unlike its peers is Ohio to Erie Trail Fund. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 39 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) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% 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.
65 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. 65 of the 68 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 EARTHSHARE ↗
- Who funds EARTHSHARE CHAPTERS INC ↗
- Who funds ANACOSTIA WATERSHED SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL FUND FOR ARIZONA INC DBA EFAZ ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds C&O CANAL TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds EARTHSHARE NEW JERSEY INC ↗
- Who funds Ohio To Erie Trail Fund ↗
- Who funds OYSTER RECOVERY PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds OHIO WILDLIFE CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE POTOMAC CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL FEDERATION OF NORTH CAROLINA INC DBA EARTHSHARE NC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL FEDERATION OF CALIFORNIA EARTHSHARE CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS INC ↗
- Who funds COLUMBUS ZOOLOGICAL PARK ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES ↗
- Who funds Potomac Riverkeeper Network ↗
- Who funds EARTH DAY NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds Nature Forward ↗
- Who funds PRAIRIE RIVERS NETWORK ↗
- Who funds PENNSYLVANIA PARKS AND FORESTS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Environmental Fund For Texas Inc ↗
- Who funds EARTHSHARE WASHINGTON ↗
- Who funds THE ADIRONDACK COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds OWL MOON RAPTOR CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Appalachian Mountain Club ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF COLUMBUS AND FRANKLIN COUNTY METRO PARKS ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL AQUARIUM INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds THE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds IRVINE NATURAL SCIENCE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds RAILS TO TRAILS CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds Global Impact ↗
- Who funds Parks & Trails New York 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: Earthshare · Chesapeake Bay Trust · Patagoniaorg · The Keith Campbell Foundation for the Environment Inc · Ibm International Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Greater Washington Community Foundation · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Veverka Family Foundation · The Elmo Foundation · Frederick Henry Prince Testamentary Trust
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 Chapters 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Rock Creek Conservancy Inc — 60% of income from government
- Housatonic Valley Association Inc — 38% of income from government
- Nature Forward — 32% of income from government
- Anacostia Watershed Society Inc — 15% of income from government
- The Howard County Conservancy Inc — 5% of income from government
- Oyster Recovery Partnership Inc — 3% of income from government
- Appalachian Mountain Club — 1% 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.