Skip to content
Emerald Cities Collaborative Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Emerald Cities Collaborative Inc

The primary purpose of Emerald Cities Collaborative, Inc.

$1.1M
Granted FY2022
18
Grants FY2022
7
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its 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 2022.

Philanthropy$458kEnvironment$259kEducation$238kFood & Nutrition$200kCommunity Improvement$90kInternational$74kHousing & Shelter$60kArts & Culture$50kOther$0
02FY2022 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2022

  • Under $10k2 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $45k
  • $50k–250k14 grants · $1.0M
$50,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$20M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Truly Living Well Center for Natural Urban Agriculture$200,000
Center on Race Poverty and the Environment$90,000
We Want Green Too$80,000
East Los Angeles College$75,000
Community Development Technologies Center$75,000
Physicians for Social Responsibility-LA$73,750
Self-Help Enterprises$60,000
Foothill-De Anza Foundation$55,214
Center for Common Ground (Concerned Citizens of Charles City County (C5)$50,000
State Center Community College District$50,000
Historic Clayborn Temple$50,000
Soulardarity$50,000
Allied Media Projects (Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition)$50,000
Riverside Community College District$50,000
Milwaukee Environmental Consortium (Wisconsin Green Muslims)$30,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 46% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%West Chester University of Pennsylvania: $7k → 6%Foothill-De Anza Foundation: $55k → 8%Center on Race Poverty and the Environment: $90k → 10%SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS INC: $9k → 14%State Center Community College District: $50k → 19%UNITE FOR DIGNITY: $25k → 15%Urban Core Collective: $15k → 11%We Want Green Too: $80k → 21%Milwaukee Environmental Consortium (Wisconsin Green Muslims): $30k → 17%Historic Clayborn Temple: $50k → 17%THE SEATTLE FOUNDATION: $113k → 9%Center for Common Ground (Concerned Citizens of Charles City County (C5): $50k → 11%East Los Angeles College: $75k → 14%Allied Media Projects (Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition): $50k → 21%The Seatlle Foundation: $125k → 9%Physicians for Social Responsibility-LA: $74k → 14%Soulardarity: $50k → 21%The Seatlle Foundation: $125k → 9%Community Development Technologies Center: $75k → 14%THE SEATTLE FOUNDATION: $58k → 9%THE SEATTLE FOUNDATION: $38k → 9%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

WA
WI
MI
PA
CA
VA
TN
GA
FL
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.
03Its 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
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
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 Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies

CEERT designs and fights for policies that advance clean, renewable, energy and climate solutions for California and the West. CEERT's team of professional staff, active board members, expert consultants, and clean-technology and…

Environment
4
Got Green

Got Green is a Climate Justice organization that envisions a future of healthy and powerful communities, where working class Black and Brown people in southeast Seattle have meaningful work, live in healthy homes, eat nourishing food, and…

Environment
5
Taproot Earth

Taproot Earth works with communities to support strategies around the use of water, energy and land.

Environment
6
Earthcorps

To cultivate leaders and community partnerships to advance environmental justice.

International
7
Climate Equity Action Fund

The climate equity action fund (ceaf) works hand-in-hand with community-based partners in critical states across the country to secure and sustain policy wins for climate and clean energy. building on over a decade of trust with leading…

Environment
8
Common Future

Common future is a network of pioneering leaders across the u.s. and canada who work deeply within their communities to create alternative approaches to business, philanthropy, and investing. we envision an economy that has transitioned…

Community Improvement
9
Climate Access Fund Corporation

The Climate Access Fund develops and finances community solar products that serve low to moderate income households

Environment
10
United for Clean Power

United for Clean Power is focused on public policies that build a 21st century energy future.

Environment
11
Central California Environmental Justice Network

To uplift low-income communities of color in the San Joaquin Valley by ensuring access to clean air, water, land, and food sovereignty.

Environment
12
Strategic Concepts in Organizing & Policy Education

To Build grassroots power to eliminate structural barriers to social and economic opportunities in low-income and disenfranchised communities.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Big We. 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

18 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. 18 of the 20 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
12/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SEATTLE FOUNDATION: $457,500 · PhilanthropySEATTLE FOUNDATIONFOOTHILL-DEANZA COMMUNITY COLLEGES FOUNDATION: $55,214 · PhilanthropyFOOTHILL-DEANZA COMMUNITY COLLEGES FO…Truly Living Well Ctr for Natural Urban: $200,000 · EnvironmentTruly Living Well Ctr…SOULARDARITY: $50,000 · EnvironmentSOULARDARITYFAIR FUTURE MOVEMENT INC: $30,000 · EnvironmentFAIR FUTURE MOVEMENT …+1 more: $8,695 · EnvironmentCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TECHNOLOGIES CENTER: $75,000 · Community ImprovementCOMMUNITY …The Big We: $50,000 · Community ImprovementThe Big WeURBAN CORE COLLECTIVE: $15,000 · Community ImprovementURBAN CORE…RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT FOUNDATION: $50,000 · OtherRIVERSIDE COMMUNITY COLLEG…STATE CENTER COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $50,000 · OtherSTATE CENTER COMMUNITY COL…UNITE FOR DIGNITY INC: $25,000 · OtherUNITE FOR DIGNITY INCPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: $73,750 · OtherPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESP…Self-Help Enterprises: $60,000 · OtherSelf-Help EnterprisesCenter for Common Ground: $50,000 · OtherCenter for Common GroundALLIED MEDIA PROJECTS INC: $50,000 · OtherALLIED MEDIA PROJECTS INC+1 more: $7,465 · OtherCENTER ON RACE POVERTY & THE ENVIRONMENT: $90,000 · Crime & LegalWE WANT GREEN TOO: $80,000 · EmploymentEAST LOS ANGELES COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $75,000 · Education
Philanthropy$512,714Environment$288,695Community Improvement$140,000Other$366,215Crime & Legal$90,000Employment$80,000Education$75,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSEATTLE FOUNDATION: $457,500 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTruly Living Well Ctr for Natural Urban: $200,000 over 1y, 33% of budgetCENTER ON RACE POVERTY & THE ENVIRONMENT: $90,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetWE WANT GREEN TOO: $80,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TECHNOLOGIES CENTER: $75,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetEAST LOS ANGELES COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $75,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: $73,750 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetSelf-Help Enterprises: $60,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFOOTHILL-DEANZA COMMUNITY COLLEGES FOUNDATION: $55,214 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetThe Big We: $50,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetRIVERSIDE COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetSTATE CENTER COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetCenter for Common Ground: $50,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetALLIED MEDIA PROJECTS INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSOULARDARITY: $50,000 over 1y, 3.9% of budgetFAIR FUTURE MOVEMENT INC: $30,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetURBAN CORE COLLECTIVE: $15,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $8,695 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Amalgamated Charitabl…United States Energy …The California Endowm…Windward FundSocial and Environmen…Natural Resources Def…Foundation for Califo…The James Irvine Foun…New Venture FundRockefeller Philanthr…ImpactassetsincVanguard Charitable E…
Amalgamated Charitable Foundation IncDC20.2× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · United States Energy Foundation · The California Endowment · Windward Fund · Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · Foundation for California Community Colleges · The James Irvine Foundation · New Venture Fund · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Impactassetsinc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program

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 Emerald Cities Collaborative Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Emerald Cities Collaborative Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 20 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Emerald Cities Collaborative’s 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