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

· Public charity

Foundation Earth

Foster an earth-centered worldview and economy.

$414k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$414k
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, FY2018 to 2024.

Food & Nutrition$1.8MEnvironment$264kCivil Rights$200k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$414,353
Median grant
1
States reached
$135k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ND PONICS$414,353
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 (FY18–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%Biodiversity for a Livable Climate: $20k → 8%International Rivers: $10k → 10%Potomac Riverkeeper: $45k → 14%ND PONICS: $594k → 12%Virginia Conservation Network: $15k → 22%Justice through Music: $100k → 8%International Rivers: $8k → 10%Potomac Riverkeeper: $27k → 14%ND PONICS: $537k → 12%Justice through Music: $100k → 8%International Rivers: $8k → 10%Potomac Riverkeeper: $10k → 14%ND PONICS: $414k → 12%Earth Day Network: $10k → 14%NDponics: $200k → 12%Earth Advocacy Institute: $15k → 14%NDPonics: $75k → 12%NDPonics: $15k → 12%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.
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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.2M · 6 repeat orgs$76k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
6

Total granted

$2.2M
$76k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+23%
+281%

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentFood & NutritionCommunity ImprovementCivil RightsOther
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

  • N
    NDPONICS
    6× · 2019–2024 · $1.8M · revenue +121% · 46% of their budget
  • JT
    JUSTICE THROUGH MUSIC PROJECT
    2× · 2018–2019 · $200k · revenue +7%
  • NC WARN INC
    2× · 2018–2019 · $45k · revenue +23%

Funded once

  • BF
    BIODIVERSITY FOR A LIVABLE CLIMATEgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $20k · revenue +315%
  • EA
    EARTH ADVOCACY INSTITUTE INC
    one grant, 2021 · $15k
  • VC
    VIRGINIA CONSERVATION NETWORKgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $15k · revenue +70%
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
Environment Now
—
2
International Council On Environmental Economics and Development Union
Human Services
3
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
4
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
5
Climate Change Truth research

Present Netzeroco2 manuscript at climate change conferences and lead a 35 PhD team to debunk climate change garbage of the iPCC

Science & Tech
6
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators

The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.

Education
7
North Carolina Conservation Network

The north carolina conservation network supports, trains, and coordinates diverse groups and directly advocates to achieve equitable and sustainable solutions for our environment.

Environment
8
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
9
Nw Energy Coalition

The NW Energy Coalition is an alliance of over 100 environmental, civic, and human service organizations, utilities, and businesses in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia, plus many individual members. The NW Energy…

—
10
The Breakthrough Institute

The Breakthrough Institute is a research center that identifies and promotes technological solutions to environmental and human development challenges.

Environment
11
Global Envirotech Initiative
Philanthropy
12
Chesapeake Stormwater Network Inc
Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chesapeake Climate Action Network Inc; the most unlike its peers is Ndponics. 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

12 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NDPONICS: $1,835,326 · Food & NutritionNDPONICSPotomac Riverkeeper Network: $82,000 · EnvironmentPotomac Rive…NC WARN INC: $45,000 · EnvironmentNC WARN INCCHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK INC: $35,000 · EnvironmentCHESAPEAKE C…International Rivers Network: $25,500 · EnvironmentInternationa…BIODIVERSITY FOR A LIVABLE CLIMATE: $20,000 · EnvironmentBIODIVERSITY…EARTH ADVOCACY INSTITUTE INC: $14,841 · EnvironmentEARTH ADVOCA…VIRGINIA CONSERVATION NETWORK: $14,500 · EnvironmentVIRGINIA CON…THE PIEDMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $10,000 · EnvironmentEARTH DAY NETWORK INC: $10,000 · EnvironmentJUSTICE THROUGH MUSIC PROJECT: $200,000 · Civil RightsJUSTICE T…ALLIANCE FOR THE SHENANDOAH VALLEY: $7,000 · Community Improvement
Food & Nutrition$1,835,326Environment$256,841Civil Rights$200,000Community Improvement$7,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNDPONICS: $1,835,326 over 6y, 46% of budgetPotomac Riverkeeper Network: $82,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetNC WARN INC: $45,000 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetCHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK INC: $35,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetInternational Rivers Network: $25,500 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetBIODIVERSITY FOR A LIVABLE CLIMATE: $20,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetVIRGINIA CONSERVATION NETWORK: $14,500 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetTHE PIEDMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetEARTH DAY NETWORK INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetALLIANCE FOR THE SHENANDOAH VALLEY: $7,000 over 1y, 1.1% 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.

The Oak Hill FundTides FoundationVanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Oak Hill FundVA15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Oak Hill Fund · Tides Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Foundation Earth funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Foundation Earth. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 Foundation Earth?

    Find your warmest path to Foundation Earth 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 12 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 Foundation Earth’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