· Private foundation
Edris Charitable Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
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.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k3 grants · $73k
- $50k–250k17 grants · $2.1M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NEIGHBORS LINK CORP | $180,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY PROJECT | $170,000 |
| RIVERKEEPER INC | $170,000 |
| CENTER FOR COASTAL STUDIES INC | $150,000 |
| GREEN FORESTS WORK INC | $135,000 |
| FEEDING WESTCHESTER INC | $135,000 |
| TADA THEATRE AND DANCE ALLIANCE INC | $130,000 |
| ST JOSEPH SOCIAL SERVICE CENTER | $120,000 |
| NJ LEEP INC | $120,000 |
| WE ACT ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE CENTER INC | $120,000 |
| LAND TO LEARN INC | $110,000 |
| WESTCHESTER LAND TRUST INC | $100,000 |
| MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC | $100,000 |
| ECOLOGICAL CITIZENS PROJECT INC | $90,000 |
| TEATOWN LAKE RESERVATION INC | $90,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $1.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 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.
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 +74% since the first grant, against +45% for the ones you funded once.
23 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- RIRIVERKEEPER INC8× · 2018–2025 · $872k · revenue +34%
- NLNEIGHBORS LINK CORP9× · 2017–2025 · $758k · revenue +274%
- EIENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY PROJECT9× · 2017–2025 · $680k · revenue +120%
Funded once
- SASYRIAN AMERICAN MEDICAL SOCIETY FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +45%
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.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
See schedule onylcv is a non-partisan policy making and political action organization that works to make environmental protection a top priority with elected officials, decision-makers and the voters by evaluating incumbent performance and…
The central new york land trust seeks to preserve and protect natural areas in order to provide our communities clean water, clean air, wildlife habitat, and a chance to connect with the land.
The adirondack council ensures the ecological integrity (clean water and air, wildlife habitat, etc.), wild character (solitude, scenic beauty, etc.), and vibrant communities of new york's six-million-acre adirondack park. the adirondack…
Acquire land and easements to preserve and enhance the open lands, forests, water resources, scenic areas and historical sights of the Woodstock, NY area. Steward protected lands and offer educational programs and events regarding nature…
We Dont Waste increases food access and protects the planet by rescuing and repurposing food, while educating and advocating to increase food security and decrease food waste.
Environmental Law Foundation's (ELF) mission is to protect the environment, communities, and consumers against harmful toxics and other environmental harms. Our work consistently improves environmental quality for those most at risk by…
New york restoration project ("nyrp") believes that nature is a fundamental right of every new yorker. nyrp works collaboratively with residents in communities across the five boroughs to renovate gardens, restore parks, plant trees,…
The natural areas conservancy champions urban natural areas in new york city and across the nation through innovative research, partnerships, and advocacy. we increase the health and resilience of urban forests and wetlands, catalyze…
Legal assistance to nonprofit organizations working to solve environmental problems that threaten the people, natural resources and communities in the new jersey and tri-state region.
See schedule onylcvef's mission is to educate, engage and empower new yorkers to be effective advocates on behalf of the environment from clean energy and funding for parks, to solid waste and green buildings. first, we educate new yorkers…
Educational & charitable. to provide legal and scientific information to public interest attorneys and scientists in numerous countries.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environmental Integrity Project and the most unlike its peers is The Field Library Inc. 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 31 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 10% 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.
22 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. 22 of the 24 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 RIVERKEEPER INC ↗
- Who funds NEIGHBORS LINK CORP ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds TADA THEATRE AND DANCE ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR COASTAL STUDIES INC ↗
- Who funds GREEN FORESTS WORK INC ↗
- Who funds NJ LEEP Inc ↗
- Who funds FEEDING WESTCHESTER INC ↗
- Who funds ST JOSEPH SOCIAL SERVICE CENTER ↗
- Who funds LAND TO LEARN ↗
- Who funds EL PRIMER PASO LTD ↗
- Who funds TEATOWN LAKE RESERVATION INC ↗
- Who funds ECOLOGICAL CITIZEN'S PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds Westchester Land Trust Inc ↗
- Who funds BRONX CONSERVATORY OF MUSIC INC ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds Life After Hate Inc ↗
- Who funds Climate Psychology Alliance North America Ltd ↗
- Who funds West Harlem Environmental Action Inc ↗
- Who funds GUIDING EYES FOR THE BLIND INC ↗
- Who funds SYRIAN AMERICAN MEDICAL SOCIETY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds The Field Library 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: The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Edris Charitable Foundation 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.
- Center for Coastal Studies Inc — 26% of income from government
- El Primer Paso Ltd — 13% 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.