Skip to content

· Private foundation

Enlyst Fund Inc

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.

$215k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Environment$650kAnimals$265kPhilanthropy$140kPublic Benefit$90kScience & Tech$40kArts & Culture$20kHuman Services$20k
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$15,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$6.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Wildlife Conservation Society$25,000
League of Conservation Voters Edu F$25,000
New Energy Nexus$25,000
Wildlife Conservation Society Inc$25,000
GRACE Center Inc$20,000
Mongabay$20,000
Oil Change International$15,000
Bushlife Conservancy$10,000
Voices for Progress Educational Fun$10,000
California Environmental Voters Edu$10,000
AltaSea at the Port of Los Angeles$10,000
Climate and Clean Energy Equity Fun$10,000
The Climate Registry$10,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY20–25, $50k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Tides Center: $15k → 10%GRACE Center Inc: $20k → 5%Tides Center: $15k → 10%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

ID
MT
NY
CA
VA
MD
DC
TX
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 10% of Enlyst Fund Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 44% of the giving stays in CA; by stated purpose, 49%.

Enlyst Fund Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.0M · 14 repeat orgs$50k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +40% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

14 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
4

Total granted

$1.0M
$30k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+40%
+13%

Still filing today

64%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentAnimalsCivil RightsPublic BenefitScience & TechHuman ServicesOther
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

  • WC
    Wildlife Conservation Society
    6× · 2020–2025 · $260k · revenue +57%
  • OC
    Oil Change International Inc
    5× · 2021–2025 · $90k · revenue +198%
  • TC
    THE CLIMATE REGISTRY
    6× · 2020–2025 · $60k · revenue +11%

Funded once

  • ES
    ECOLOGICAL SOLUTIONS
    one grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue -99% · 32% of their budget
  • CL
    CA League of Conservation Voters Ed
    one grant, 2021 · $10k
  • AB
    American Bird Conservancygraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +30%
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
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
Climate Foundation

To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.

Science & Tech
3
Climate Breakthrough Inc

To launch breakthrough climate mitigation efforts by identifying, supporting, and unleashing innovative leaders with transformative strategies.

Human Services
4
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
5
Coalition for Green Capital D/B/a American Green Bank Consortium

Cgc operates as a nonprofit financial institution that invests directly and through partners to transform financial markets by using public and private investing to accelerate the deployment of projects that strengthen the grid, reduce…

Environment
6
American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy

Aceee seeks to aggressively mobilize and scale up energy efficiency to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and combat climate change, and to do so at substantial economic savings. we seek a vibrant and equitable economy that uses energy more…

Environment
7
Terraset

Terraset uses philanthropic capital to purchase permanent, high-quality carbon removal. we pool donations from individuals, foundations, family offices, and donor advised funds, and make strategic purchases of high-quality carbon removal…

Environment
8
Climate Leadership Council Inc

To develop and promote a carbon dividends framework - based on carbon fees whose revenues are rebated to citizens through dividends - as the most cost-effective, equitable, and politically viable climate solution.

Environment
9
California Clean Energy Fund

The california clean energy fund supports entrepreneurs to drive innovation and build equity into the clean economy.

Environment
10
Environment Next Inc

Environment next supports individuals, nonprofits and businesses around the world on solutions to complex climate issues. we provide leadership, outreach and communication support, grants, and investments to empower leaders and their ideas…

Environment
11
E3G Third Generation Environmentalism

E3g is a leading international not-for-profit think tank specialising in climate diplomacy harnessing expertise in the politics and economics of climate change.

Environment
12
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mongabay Org Corp; the most unlike its peers is Ecological Solutions. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

17 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. 17 of the 23 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)
17/17
Grantees still filing
11/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NEW VENTURE FUND: $90,000 · EnvironmentNEW VENTURE FUNDTHE CLIMATE REGISTRY: $60,000 · EnvironmentTHE CLIMATE REGISTRYCLIMATE AND CLEAN ENERGY EQUITY FUND: $50,000 · EnvironmentCLIMATE AND CLEAN ENERGY EQUITY FU…MONGABAY ORG CORP: $50,000 · EnvironmentMONGABAY ORG CORPBUSHLIFE CONSERVANCY: $45,000 · EnvironmentBUSHLIFE CONSERVANCYWINDWARD FUND: $35,000 · EnvironmentWINDWARD FUNDCalCef Innovations: $30,000 · EnvironmentCalCef Innovations+2 more: $15,000 · EnvironmentLeague of Conservation Voters Edu F: $165,000 · OtherLeague of Conservation Voters Ed…New Energy Nexus: $70,000 · OtherNew Energy NexusVoices for Progress Educational Fun: $50,000 · OtherVoices for Progress Educational …California Environmental Voters Edu: $40,000 · OtherCalifornia Environmental Voters …New Media Ventures Education Fund: $20,000 · OtherNew Media Ventures Education Fun…+1 more: $10,000 · OtherWildlife Conservation Society: $260,000 · AnimalsWildlife Conservation So…+1 more: $5,000 · AnimalsOil Change International Inc: $90,000 · Public BenefitTIDES CENTER: $30,000 · Human ServicesTHE GRACE CENTER: $20,000 · Human ServicesALTASEA AT THE PORT OF LOS ANGELES: $40,000 · Science & TechTake Back The Court Foundation: $30,000 · Civil RightsTIDES FOUNDATION: $20,000 · Philanthropy
Environment$375,000Other$355,000Animals$265,000Public Benefit$90,000Human Services$50,000Science & Tech$40,000Civil Rights$30,000Philanthropy$20,000

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 budgetWildlife Conservation Society: $260,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetOil Change International Inc: $90,000 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $90,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CLIMATE REGISTRY: $60,000 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetCLIMATE AND CLEAN ENERGY EQUITY FUND: $50,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetMONGABAY ORG CORP: $50,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetBUSHLIFE CONSERVANCY: $45,000 over 6y, 2.7% of budgetALTASEA AT THE PORT OF LOS ANGELES: $40,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetWINDWARD FUND: $35,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCalCef Innovations: $30,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTake Back The Court Foundation: $30,000 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetECOLOGICAL SOLUTIONS: $10,000 over 1y, 32% of budgetAmerican Bird Conservancy: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAWTOOTH BOTANICAL GARDEN: $5,000 over 1y, 1.5% 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.

  • Who funds Wildlife Conservation Society ↗
  • Who funds Oil Change International Inc ↗
  • Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
  • Who funds THE CLIMATE REGISTRY ↗
  • Who funds CLIMATE AND CLEAN ENERGY EQUITY FUND ↗
  • Who funds MONGABAY ORG CORP ↗
  • Who funds BUSHLIFE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds ALTASEA AT THE PORT OF LOS ANGELES ↗
  • Who funds WINDWARD FUND ↗
  • Who funds CalCef Innovations ↗
  • Who funds Take Back The Court Foundation ↗
  • Who funds TIDES CENTER ↗
  • Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE GRACE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds ECOLOGICAL SOLUTIONS ↗
  • Who funds American Bird Conservancy ↗
  • Who funds SAWTOOTH BOTANICAL GARDEN ↗

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.

Tides FoundationCA13.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tides Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · New Venture Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Enlyst Fund Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Enlyst Fund 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%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Enlyst Fund Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Enlyst Fund Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 23 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-PF 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 Enlyst’s filings →

    More from the funding graph