Skip to content
Earthworks at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Earthworks

The Corporation is organized exclusively for charitable and educational purposes.

$468k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$63k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Environment$1.9MCivil Rights$116kCommunity Improvement$94kArts & Culture$69kHuman Services$52kHealth$47kEducation$42kHousing & Shelter$34kOther$0
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 13 grants below total $243,900, the rows itemized in this filing. The $467,927 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $224,027 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $53k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $68k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $123k
$8,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$14M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its 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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Micah Six Eight Mission: $8k → 17%Micah Six Eight Mission: $8k → 17%Tribal Images Museum Inc: $44k → 17%Tribal Images Museum Inc: $8k → 17%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

AK
ME
VT
WA
ID
MT
MN
NY
NV
OH
PA
CA
CO
AZ
NM
DC
LA
TX

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.

Sub-Saharan Africa$95k · 57% · 3 grants · 1 person

Stated purpose: Subgrant for mine waste and pollution · Support for responsible mine tailings management · Community support on water pollution

South America$26k · 16% · 1 grant · 5 people

Stated purpose: Support for frontline communities · Support for event logistics · Project Support

Central America and the Caribbean$20k · 12% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: Subgrant for air quality monitoring program

East Asia and the Pacific$20k · 12% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: Community support on water pollution · Support for meetings and IRMA Audits

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$6k · 3% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: Support for awareness and community safety around mining pollution.

How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

67%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 29 repeat orgs$821k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +46% since the first grant, against +3% for those 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

29
20

Total granted

$1.7M
$702k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
+3%

Still filing today

83%
65%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 51% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $119k 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
EnvironmentCommunity ImprovementEducationHuman ServicesCivil RightsPublic BenefitOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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
    Earthworks Action Fund
    4× · 2018–2024 · $376k · revenue +91% · 47% of their budget
  • II
    International Indigenous Fund For Development and Solidarity Batani
    2× · 2024–2025 · $163k · revenue +4%
  • OC
    Oil Change International Inc
    2× · 2017–2018 · $160k · revenue +198%

Funded once

  • SM
    SUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2023 · $468k · revenue +22%
  • TE
    TEXAS ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVOCACY
    one grant, 2020 · $28k · revenue +20%
  • IF
    INSTITUTE FOR POLICY STUDIES
    one grant, 2024 · $20k · revenue 0%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Earthworks

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…

Public Benefit
2
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
3
Center for Contemporary Documentation Inc
Philanthropy
4
Texas Clean Energy Coalition
—
5
Environment Now
—
6
International Council On Environmental Economics and Development Union
Human Services
7
Educator Collective for Envionmental Justice Inc

Environmental Justice & Equality

Education
8
International Conservation Caucus Network

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.

Unclassified
9
Western Resource Advocates

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,…

Crime & Legal
10
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
11
Science & Environmental Health Network

In service to communities, the earth and future generations, the science and environmental health network forges science, ethics, and law into tools for action.

Environment
12
Collaborative Earth Institute

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.

Science & Tech
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sustainable Markets Foundation; 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.
04the grantee network

42 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
13
Early backer (in before they grew)
41/42
Grantees still filing
26/42
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION: $467,500 · EnvironmentSUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATIONEarthworks Action Fund: $375,668 · EnvironmentEarthworks Action FundBEYOND EXTREME ENERGY: $117,030 · EnvironmentBEYOND EXTREME ENERGYMOUNTAIN WATERSHED ASSOCIATION INC: $67,875 · EnvironmentINITIATIVE FOR RESPONSIBLE MINING ASSURANCE: $60,000 · EnvironmentDINE CITIZENS AGAINST RUINING OUR ENVIRONMENT: $53,129 · Environment+14 more: $273,721 · Environment+14 moreEvansville Tribal Council: $50,000 · OtherEvansville Tribal …COMITE CIVICO DEL VALLE INC: $46,500 · OtherCOMITE CIVICO DEL …NEZ PERCE TRIBE: $36,000 · OtherNEZ PERCE TRIBETexas Permian Future Generations: $32,375 · OtherTexas Permian Futu…CARRIZO COMECRUDO NATION OF TEXAS INC: $28,000 · OtherCARRIZO COMECRUDO …LIVEABLE ARLINGTON: $22,600 · OtherLIVEABLE ARLINGTONNative Village of Ambler: $20,000 · OtherPORT ARTHUR COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK: $16,000 · OtherPROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA: $27,000 · OtherPROGRESSIVE LEADER…INSTITUTE FOR ENHANCED EQUITY: $18,200 · OtherTexas Campaign for the Environment Fund: $31,000 · OtherTexas Campaign for…+9 more: $70,762 · Other+9 moreInternational Indigenous Fund For Development and Solidarity Batani: $162,800 · InternationalINSTITUTE FOR POLICY STUDIES: $20,000 · InternationalOil Change International Inc: $160,000 · Public BenefitGround Game Fund: $20,000 · Public BenefitSEVENTH GENERATION FUND FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES INC: $57,200 · Human ServicesTRIBAL IMAGES MUSEUM INC: $52,000 · Human ServicesMICAH SIX EIGHT MISSION: $16,000 · Human ServicesSOCIETY OF NATIVE NATIONS: $56,570 · Community ImprovementWESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS EDUCATION PROJECT: $20,000 · Community ImprovementINGLESIDE ON THE BAY COASTAL WATCH ASSOCIATION: $8,000 · Community ImprovementSOUTHERN SECTOR RISING: $8,000 · Community ImprovementETHICAL METALSMITHS: $26,078 · EducationINDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK: $20,000 · EducationCITIZENS FOR CLEAN AIR AND WATER IN BRAZORIA COUNTY: $16,000 · EducationSAFE 4 COMMUNITIES: $16,000 · Education
Environment$1,414,923Other$398,437International$182,800Public Benefit$180,000Human Services$125,200Community Improvement$92,570Education$78,078

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION: $467,500 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetEarthworks Action Fund: $375,668 over 4y, 47% of budgetInternational Indigenous Fund For Development and Solidarity Batani: $162,800 over 2y, 8.8% of budgetOil Change International Inc: $160,000 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetBEYOND EXTREME ENERGY: $117,030 over 2y, 59% of budgetMOUNTAIN WATERSHED ASSOCIATION INC: $67,875 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetSEVENTH GENERATION FUND FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES INC: $57,200 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetSOCIETY OF NATIVE NATIONS: $56,570 over 5y, 5.1% of budgetDINE CITIZENS AGAINST RUINING OUR ENVIRONMENT: $53,129 over 3y, 7.1% of budgetTRIBAL IMAGES MUSEUM INC: $52,000 over 2y, 4.4% of budgetWestern Leaders Network: $47,000 over 3y, 6.4% of budgetCOMITE CIVICO DEL VALLE INC: $46,500 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetTexas Campaign for the Environment Fund: $31,000 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetRGISC INC: $29,000 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetSUNRISE MOVEMENT EDUCATION FUND: $28,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetCARRIZO COMECRUDO NATION OF TEXAS INC: $28,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetTEXAS ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVOCACY: $27,710 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetPROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA: $27,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetETHICAL METALSMITHS: $26,078 over 2y, 16% of budgetEarth Island Institute Inc: $23,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetHONOR THE EARTH: $21,400 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR POLICY STUDIES: $20,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetGround Game Fund: $20,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetWESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS EDUCATION PROJECT: $20,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR ENHANCED EQUITY: $18,200 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetMICAH SIX EIGHT MISSION: $16,000 over 2y, 5.0% of budgetHEALTHY GULF: $16,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetSAFE 4 COMMUNITIES: $16,000 over 2y, 5.7% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMN350: $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetBlack Appalachian Coalition: $8,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetINGLESIDE ON THE BAY COASTAL WATCH ASSOCIATION: $8,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetSOUTHERN SECTOR RISING: $8,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetEXTENSIVE EMPOWERMENT PROJECT INC: $8,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetOIL & GAS ACTION NETWORK: $8,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCalhoun County Resource Watch: $8,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetGreat Basin Resource Watch: $6,500 over 1y, 2.8% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Rockefeller Family Fu…The Schmidt Family Fo…Resources Legacy FundWindward FundAmalgamated Charitabl…Rockefeller Philanthr…Sustainable Markets F…Tides FoundationPatagoniaorgUnited States Energy …Sierra ClubHealthy Gulf
Rockefeller Family Fund IncNY41.9× affinity18 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Earthworks funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Earthworks. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    4report 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
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 55 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Earthworks’ filings →

    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 endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home