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

· Public charity

Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

$1.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$349k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2024.

Environment$3.4MAnimals$223k
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $432,376, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,509,340 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,076,964 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 · FY2024

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $83k
  • $250k+1 grant · $349k
$20,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$6.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CODE4NATURE$349,376
ALASKA WILDLIFE ALLIANCE$38,000
GUNUNG ORANGUTAN CONSERVATION PROGRAM$20,000
CENTER FOR AMAZON COMMUNITY CENTER$15,000
WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC$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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 6%. 99% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 6%GUNUNG ORANGUTAN CONSERVATION PROGRAM: $20k → 8%US WORKING GROUP INC: $8k → 11%CODE4NATURE: $349k → 16%WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $25k → 14%NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $46k → 6%INTERNATIONAL ANTI-POACHING FOUNDATION: $17k → 7%CIEL: $80k → 7%GUNUNG PALUNG ORANGUTAN CONSERVATION PROG: $20k → 8%US WORKING GROUP INC: $8k → 11%CODE4NATURE: $332k → 16%WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $10k → 14%INTERNATIONAL ANTI-POACHING FOUNDATION: $17k → 7%REVERB: $60k → 7%GUNUNG ORANGUTAN CONSERVATION PROGRAM: $20k → 8%CODE4NATURE: $331k → 16%CIEL: $138k → 14%INTERNATIONAL ANTI-POACHING FOUNDATION: $10k → 7%CIEL: $60k → 7%INTERNATIONAL ANTI-POACHING FOUNDATION: $15k → 8%CENTER FOR AMAZON COMMUNITY CENTER: $33k → 16%CIEL: $125k → 14%WORLD FOREST ID ASSOCIATION: $9k → 7%REVERB: $57k → 7%CENTER FOR AMAZON COMMUNITY CENTER: $16k → 16%CENTER FOR AMAZON COMMUNITY CENTER: $17k → 14%INTERNATIONAL ANTI-POACHING FOUNDATION: $8k → 7%REVERB: $48k → 7%CENTER FOR AMAZON COMMUNITY CENTER: $14k → 16%CENTER FOR AMAZON COMMUNITY CENTER: $17k → 14%REVERB: $35k → 7%CENTER FOR AMAZON COMMUNITY ECOLOGY: $12k → 16%CENTER FOR AMAZON COMMUNITY CENTER: $15k → 14%REVERB: $21k → 7%CODE4NATURE: $399k → 14%CODE4NATURE: $335k → 14%CODE4NATURE: $283k → 14%CIEL: $209k → 14%ALASKA WILDLIFE ALLIANCE: $38k → 14%CIEL: $201k → 14%ALASKA WILDLIFE ALLIANCE: $32k → 14%CIEL: $147k → 14%ALASKA WILDLIFE ALLIANCE: $26k → 14%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.

Grants abroad, by region: $1.1M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 4 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$652k · 61% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: SUPPORT WORK ON ILLEGAL LOGGING AND DEFORESTATION AND EXTRACTIVES ISSUES · SUPPORT WORK ON ILLEGAL LOGGING AND DEFORESTATION, AND OCEANS WORK

South America$227k · 21% · 6 grants

Stated purpose: SUPPORT WORK ON ILLEGAL LOGGING AND DEFORESTATION AND SUPPORT IPLCS · SUPPORT WORK ON ILLEGAL LOGGING AND DEFORESTATION

Sub-Saharan Africa$130k · 12% · 8 grants

Stated purpose: SUPPORT WORK ON ILLEGAL LOGGING AND DEFORESTATION · SUPPORT WORK ON EXTRACTIVES ISSUES · SUPPORT WORK ON ILLEGAL LOGGING AND DEFORESTATION AND EXTRACTIVES ISSUES

East Asia and the Pacific$62k · 6% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: ELEPHANT PROTECTION AND STOP ILLEGAL IVORY TRADE

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.
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 54% of Environmental Investigation Agency’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 55% of the giving stays in DC; by stated purpose, 4%.

Environmental Investigation Agencylessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 61% directed abroad (not shown)
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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.6M · 9 repeat orgs$54k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +73% since the first grant, against +33% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
2

Total granted

$3.6M
$54k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+73%
+33%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentAnimalsInternationalOther
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

  • CI
    Code4Nature Inc
    6× · 2019–2024 · $2.0M · revenue +73% · 96% of their budget
  • CF
    CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW INC
    7× · 2017–2023 · $959k · revenue +500%
  • RI
    REVERB INC
    5× · 2017–2021 · $220k · revenue +369%

Funded once

  • NW
    NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $46k · revenue +33%
  • WF
    World Forest ID Association
    one grant, 2022 · $9k · revenue -4%
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
Amazon Conservation Team

The amazon conservation team (act) partners with indigenous and other local communities to protect tropical forests and strengthen traditional culture.

Science & Tech
2
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
3
African Wildlife Foundation Inc

Awf's mission is to ensure wildlife and wild lands thrive in modern africa. we work to equip african governments, institutions, business, and communities with the tools, insights, and support they need to define, own, and realize a…

Animals
4
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.": - count it: our work is…

International
5
Wildlife Alliance Inc

Wildlife alliance is the leader in direct protection of forests and wildlife in tropical asia. our mission is to combat deforestation, biodiversity loss, climate change, and poverty by partnering with local communities and governments.…

Animals
6
Rainforest Alliance Inc

RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.

—
7
Fundacion Cordillera Tropical

Conservation of natural resources

International
8
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
9
Wildlife Conservation Society

The wildlife conservation society (wcs) saves wildlife and wild places worldwide through science, conservation action, education, and inspiring people to value nature.

Animals
10
Wild Landscapes Inc

Wild landscapes, inc. (wli) is dedicated to conserving large and connected landscapes globally significant to wildlife and crucial to local communities. our environmental conservation strategy is to empower communities, conservationists,…

Animals
11
Rainforest Alliance Holding Inc

RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.

Environment
12
Rare

Rare inspires change so people and nature thrive.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Us Working Group Inc; the most unlike its peers is Gunung Palung Orangutan Conservation Program Inc. 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

11 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.

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

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
9/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Code4Nature Inc: $2,029,782 · EnvironmentCode4Nature IncREVERB INC: $220,362 · EnvironmentREVERB INCCENTER FOR AMAZON COMMUNITY ECOLOGY: $124,020 · EnvironmentAlaska Wildlife Alliance: $96,000 · Environment+2 more: $70,705 · EnvironmentCENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW INC: $959,041 · InternationalCENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL ENVI…AKASHINGA INC: $66,500 · AnimalsNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $45,500 · AnimalsGunung Palung Orangutan Conservation Program Inc: $40,000 · AnimalsWorld Forest ID Association: $8,600 · Other
Environment$2,540,869International$959,041Animals$152,000Other$8,600

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 budgetCode4Nature Inc: $2,029,782 over 6y, 96% of budgetCENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW INC: $959,041 over 7y, 8.9% of budgetREVERB INC: $220,362 over 5y, 3.7% of budgetCENTER FOR AMAZON COMMUNITY ECOLOGY: $124,020 over 7y, 30% of budgetAlaska Wildlife Alliance: $96,000 over 3y, 8.7% of budgetAKASHINGA INC: $66,500 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $45,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGunung Palung Orangutan Conservation Program Inc: $40,000 over 2y, 3.1% of budgetUS WORKING GROUP INC: $35,705 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $35,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWorld Forest ID Association: $8,600 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA4.1× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Environmental Investigation Agency funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Environmental Investigation Agency. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 27%
  • Gunung Palung Orangutan Conservation Program Inc: 27% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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 Environmental Investigation Agency?

Find your warmest path to Environmental Investigation Agency 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 11 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Environmental Investigation Agency’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