· Public charity
Earthworks
The Corporation is organized exclusively for charitable and educational purposes.
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 13 grants below total $243,900 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $467,927 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $224,027 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 $10k7 grants · $53k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $68k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $123k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Batani Foundation | $62,800 |
| Initiative for Responsible Mining Assurance (IRMA) | $60,000 |
| Honor the Earth | $21,400 |
| Evansville Tribal Council | $20,000 |
| Sierra Club Foundation | $15,000 |
| Ground Game Fund | $12,000 |
| Calhoun County Resource Watch | $8,000 |
| RGISC Inc | $8,000 |
| SAFE Communities | $8,000 |
| Native Village Traditional Council Mary's Igloo traditional Council | $7,500 |
| Teller Traditional Council | $7,500 |
| Seventh Generation Fund for Indigenous Peoples | $7,200 |
| Comite Civico del Valle | $6,500 |
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 (FY22–24, $68k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, 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
Grants abroad, by region — $167k on the FY2025 return
Schedule F, as filed: 5 regions, $148k to organizations and $19k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: Subgrant for mine waste and pollution · Support for responsible mine tailings management · Community support on water pollution
Stated purpose: Support for frontline communities · Support for event logistics · Project Support
Stated purpose: Subgrant for air quality monitoring program
Stated purpose: Community support on water pollution · Support for meetings and IRMA Audits
Stated purpose: Support for awareness and community safety around mining pollution.
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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
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 +23% since the first grant, against +3% for the ones you funded once.
29 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 22 since wound down; 6 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, 51% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $119k 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
- EAEarthworks Action Fund4× · 2018–2024 · $376k · revenue +91% · 47% of their budget
- IIInternational Indigenous Fund For Development and Solidarity Batani2× · 2024–2025 · $163k · revenue +4%
- OCOil Change International Inc2× · 2017–2018 · $160k · revenue +198%
Funded once
- SMSUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · $468k · revenue +22%
- TETEXAS ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVOCACYone grant, 2020 · $28k · revenue +20%
- IEINDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORKgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $20k · revenue +51%
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.
The Corporation is organized exclusively for charitable and educational purposes. Earthworks is dedicated to protecting communities and the environment from the impacts of irresponsible mineral and energy development while seeking…
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…
Environmental Justice & Equality
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.
Western Resource Advocates (WRA) is a regional nonprofit advocacy organization fighting climate change and its impacts to sustain the environment, economy, and people of the West. As the region's go-to experts for more than three decades,…
In service to communities, the earth and future generations, the science and environmental health network forges science, ethics, and law into tools for action.
We are scientists and engineers, humanists and designers. Coming together across disciplinary and cultural boundaries, we form focused teams to discover and co-create pathways to social and ecological regeneration.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sustainable Markets Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Chaparral Community Coalition for Health and Envir. 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 10 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 24% of your grantees by number, and just 15% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 5% 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.
42 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. 42 of the 55 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 SUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Earthworks Action Fund ↗
- Who funds International Indigenous Fund For Development and Solidarity Batani ↗
- Who funds Oil Change International Inc ↗
- Who funds BEYOND EXTREME ENERGY ↗
- Who funds MOUNTAIN WATERSHED ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds INITIATIVE FOR RESPONSIBLE MINING ASSURANCE ↗
- Who funds SEVENTH GENERATION FUND FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES INC ↗
- Who funds SOCIETY OF NATIVE NATIONS ↗
- Who funds DINE CITIZENS AGAINST RUINING OUR ENVIRONMENT ↗
- Who funds TRIBAL IMAGES MUSEUM INC ↗
- Who funds Western Leaders Network ↗
- Who funds COMITE CIVICO DEL VALLE INC ↗
- Who funds Texas Campaign for the Environment Fund ↗
- Who funds RGISC INC ↗
- Who funds SUNRISE MOVEMENT EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds CARRIZO COMECRUDO NATION OF TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds TEXAS ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVOCACY ↗
- Who funds PROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA ↗
- Who funds ETHICAL METALSMITHS ↗
- Who funds Earth Island Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds HONOR THE EARTH ↗
- Who funds WESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS EDUCATION PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Ground Game Fund ↗
- Who funds INDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR POLICY STUDIES ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR ENHANCED EQUITY ↗
- Who funds Big Bend Conservation Alliance ↗
- Who funds CHAPARRAL COMMUNITY COALITION FOR HEALTH AND ENVIR ↗
- Who funds HEALTHY GULF ↗
- Who funds MICAH SIX EIGHT MISSION ↗
- Who funds CITIZENS FOR CLEAN AIR AND WATER IN BRAZORIA COUNTY ↗
- Who funds SAFE 4 COMMUNITIES ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
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: Rockefeller Family Fund Inc · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · Windward Fund · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Sustainable Markets Foundation · Tides Foundation · Patagoniaorg · United States Energy Foundation · Sierra Club · Healthy Gulf
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 Earthworks 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.