Skip to content
Foundation For A Sustainable Future at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Foundation For A Sustainable Future

To Promote the Sustainable Future of the Earth thru education and the support of programs and students in developing cost effective Sustainability Programs

$1.1M
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$225k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its 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, FY2023 to 2024.

Environment$62kEducation$60kCommunity Improvement$20kScience & Tech$20kArts & Culture$9k
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 12 grants below total $890,886, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,089,675 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $198,789 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $100k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $785k
$58,300
Median grant
5
States reached
$2.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Sacred Earth Church$225,000
Heart and Soul Center of Light$200,000
Earth Law Center$159,348
The Pacific Forest Trust Inc$72,424
Global Footprint Network$69,864
Rishihood Foundation$58,300
Foundation for Excellence$25,000
California Institute of Intergal Studies$24,200
Mozart Yourth Camerata Inc$22,450
Post Carbon Institute$18,600
Foresight Institute$10,000
The Mentor Capital Network$5,700
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 (FY23–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, 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%Rishihood Foundation: $58k → 8%Global Footprint Network: $70k → 10%California Institute of Intergal Studies: $24k → 10%Earth Law Center: $159k → 12%Sacred Earth Church: $225k → 10%Mentor Capital Network: $20k → 11%Foundation for Excellence: $35k → 8%Global Footprint Network: $12k → 10%The Pacific Forest Trust Inc: $72k → 10%Earth Law Center: $15k → 12%The Mentor Capital Network: $6k → 11%Foundation for Excellence: $25k → 8%Mozart Yourth Camerata Inc: $22k → 10%The Pacific Forest Trust Inc: $24k → 10%Foundation for Excellence: $25k → 8%Mozart Yourth Camerata Inc: $9k → 10%Foresight Institute: $20k → 10%Heart and Soul Center of Light: $200k → 10%Foresight Institute: $10k → 10%Team Cerra Nora: $6k → 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.
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.

49%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$523k · 7 repeat orgs$539k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
2

Total granted

$523k
$26k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+1%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 42% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $513k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’23’24’25
EnvironmentEducationCivil RightsSocial ScienceArts & CultureScience & TechOther
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

  • EL
    EARTH LAW CENTER
    2× · 2024–2025 · $174k · revenue 0%
  • TP
    The Pacific Forest Trust Incorporated
    2× · 2024–2025 · $97k · revenue 0%
  • FF
    FOUNDATION FOR EXCELLENCE INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $85k · revenue +60%

Funded once

  • CANDID
    one grant, 2024 · $20k · revenue +1%
  • TC
    Team Cerro Nara
    one grant, 2024 · $6k
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
Conservation International Foundation

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

Environment
2
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
3
The Breakthrough Institute

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

Environment
4
Collaborative Earth Institute

We are scientists and engineers, humanists and designers. Coming together across disciplinary and cultural boundaries, we form focused teams to discover and co-create pathways to social and ecological regeneration.

Science & Tech
5
The Earth Genome

We exist to ensure the world's key decision makers consistently and routinely take into account the full value of nature and the consequences of their activities on natural systems, thereby averting economic and social disruptions due to…

Environment
6
Natura Bolivia Foundation

The Natura Bolivia Foundation is dedicated to implementing, and evaluating the impact of conservation and development programs, with a focus on watershed conservation, protected areas, and incentive based conservation in Bolivia. We work…

International
7
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 cctruth.org

Science & Tech
8
Chile-California Council

The Chile-California Council is a San Francisco-based nonprofit dedicated to developing and promoting joint endeavors and cooperative relations between Chile and California, as well as individuals, legal entities and other institutions in…

International
9
Climate Foundation

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

Science & Tech
10
Center for Sustainable Economy

Promoting economic sustainability

Environment
11
Nalanda 20

Improve excellence and access in higher education. Current focus is on India. Thus, Nalanda 2.0's current focus is to make India's higher education system world-class by building a world-class multidisciplinary research university,…

Education
12
Impossible Foundation
Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Global Footprint Network Inc; the most unlike its peers is Mozart Youth Camerata. 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

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. 11 of the 14 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/11
Grantees still filing
2/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Sacred Earth Church: $225,000 · OtherSacred Earth ChurchHeart and Soul Center of Light: $200,000 · OtherHeart and Soul Center of LightThe Pacific Forest Trust Incorporated: $96,574 · OtherThe Pacific Forest Trust IncorporatedRishihood Foundation: $58,300 · OtherRishihood FoundationEARTH LAW CENTER: $174,218 · Social ScienceEARTH LAW CENTERGLOBAL FOOTPRINT NETWORK INC: $81,688 · EnvironmentGLOBAL FOOT…METAFOUNDATION DBA POST CARBON INSTITUTE: $23,890 · EnvironmentMETAFOUNDAT…Team Cerro Nara: $6,002 · EnvironmentTeam Cerro …FOUNDATION FOR EXCELLENCE INC: $85,000 · EducationFOUNDATION …CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF INTEGRAL STUDIES: $24,200 · EducationCALIFORNIA …Mozart Youth Camerata: $31,250 · Arts & CultureThe Foresight Institute: $30,000 · Science & TechCANDID: $20,070 · PhilanthropyWILLIAM JAMES FOUNDATION DBA MENTOR CAPITAL NETWORK: $5,700 · Civil Rights
Other$579,874Social Science$174,218Environment$111,580Education$109,200Arts & Culture$31,250Science & Tech$30,000Philanthropy$20,070Civil Rights$5,700

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetEARTH LAW CENTER: $174,218 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetThe Pacific Forest Trust Incorporated: $96,574 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR EXCELLENCE INC: $85,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetGLOBAL FOOTPRINT NETWORK INC: $81,688 over 2y, 7.6% of budgetMozart Youth Camerata: $31,250 over 2y, 30% of budgetThe Foresight Institute: $30,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF INTEGRAL STUDIES: $24,200 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMETAFOUNDATION DBA POST CARBON INSTITUTE: $23,890 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetCANDID: $20,070 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTeam Cerro Nara: $6,002 over 1y, 8.8% 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.

Silicon Valley Commun…Gs Donor Advised Phil…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA11.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 For A Sustainable Future funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Foundation For A Sustainable Future. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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 14 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Foundation For A Sustainable Future’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