Skip to content
Foundation for Human Conservation at a glance

· Private foundation

Foundation for Human Conservation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$9k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0187% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$34kInternational$12kEnvironment$10kHousing & Shelter$3kSocial Science$3kHuman Services$3kCivil Rights$3kAnimals$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$28k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Central Valley Animal Rescue$2,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
Americares$1,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
Habitat$1,000
Jefferson Emery Fire Dept$1,000
Mercy Ships$500
Tri Area Food Bank$500
KUOW$150
Salvation Army$150
Cascade PBS$150
Wikimedia Foundation$100
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 70% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%WORLD POPULATION BALANCE: $3k → 14%EARTH OVERSHOOT: $1k → 10%GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE: $1k → 17%Mercy Ships: $500 → 12%EARTH X: $1k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD COLUMBIAWILLAMETTE: $1k → 12%Americares: $1k → 9%Washington National Parks: $1k → 9%Central Valley Animal Rescue: $2k → 11%NUMBERS USA: $2k → 7%NEGATIVE POPULATION GROWTH: $1k → 9%World Population Balance: $1k → 14%EARTH OVERSHOOT INC: $1k → 10%GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE: $500 → 17%Mercy Ships: $500 → 12%Americares: $1k → 9%Washington National Parks: $1k → 9%Central Valley Animal Rescue: $500 → 11%NUMBERS USA: $2k → 7%NEGATIVE POPULATION GROWTH: $1k → 9%WORLD POPULATION BALANCE: $500 → 14%EARTH OVERSHOOT INC: $1k → 10%Guttmacher Institute: $500 → 17%Americares: $1k → 9%Planned Parenthood of GPNW: $2k → 9%Bayside Housing and Services: $2k → 11%NUMBERS USA: $1k → 7%Earth Overshoot: $1k → 10%AMERICARES: $500 → 9%WASHINGTON NATIONAL PARKS: $500 → 9%TRI-AREA FOOD BANK: $1k → 11%NUMBERS USA: $1k → 7%EARTH OVERSHOOT INC: $1k → 10%TRI-AREA FOOD BANK: $500 → 11%NUMBERS USA RESEARCH & EDUCATION: $1k → 7%FEDERATION FOR IMMIGRATION REFORM: $500 → 14%Tri Area Food Bank: $500 → 11%OCEAN CLEANUP NORTH PACIFIC FOUNDATION: $500 → 17%CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES: $1k → 14%Jefferson Emery Fire Dept: $1k → 11%Habitat: $1k → 11%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $5k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $2k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GPNW: $2k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GPNW: $1k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $1k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $1k → 14%Ukraine House DC Foundation: $1k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
MN
NY
OR
PA
CT
CA
VA
AZ
KS
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 100% of Foundation for Human Conservation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 27% of the giving stays in WA; by stated purpose, 0%.

Foundation for Human Conservationlessmore 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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$64k · 22 repeat orgs$17k to everyone else

22 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
17

Total granted

$64k
$15k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+35%
+80%

Still filing today

55%
47%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 71% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationInternationalArts & CultureSocial ScienceHuman ServicesCivil 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

  • WP
    WORLD POPULATION BALANCE
    4× · 2020–2023 · $5k · revenue +14%
  • AMERICARES FOUNDATION INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $4k · revenue +35%
  • CC
    COMPASSION & CHOICES
    3× · 2021–2023 · $3k · revenue +40%

Funded once

  • UF
    UCSF FOUNDATION (end of Roe study)
    one grant, 2023 · $5k
  • BH
    BAYSIDE HOUSING & SERVICES
    one grant, 2024 · $2k · revenue 0%
  • ED
    EARTH DAY TEXAS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $1k · revenue +105%
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 Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
3
Global Poverty Project Inc

Our mission is to build a movement of global citizens whose actions will help achieve our vision of a world without extreme poverty.

Social Science
4
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
5
Oceana Inc

To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.

Environment
6
Ocean Conservancy

Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.

Environment
7
Waterorg

Water.org's goal is to bring safe water and sanitation to the world through access to small, affordable loans.

International
8
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
9
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
10
Cdp North America Inc

Cdp north america, inc. 's ("cdp-na") vision for the future is a thriving economy that works for people and planet in the long term. we focus investors and companies on taking urgent action to build a truly sustainable economy by measuring…

Environment
11
Wildaid Inc

Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.

Animals
12
The Population Council Inc

We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world. we take a multidisciplinary, intergenerational, life-cycle approach that contributes to (see schedule o)four global…

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wikimedia Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Earth Day Texas 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

23 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. 23 of the 45 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/23
Grantees still filing
16/23
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $9,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOODNUMBERS USA: $5,500 · OtherNUMBERS USAUCSF FOUNDATION (end of Roe study): $5,000 · OtherUCSF FOUNDATION (end of Roe study)Planned Parenthood of GPNW: $5,000 · OtherPlanned Parenthood of GPNWWORLD POPULATION BALANCE: $4,850 · OtherWORLD POPULATION BALANCEIndividual grant recipient: $2,700 · OtherGuttmacher Institute Inc: $2,200 · OtherCOMPASSION & CHOICES: $2,000 · OtherTRI-AREA FOOD BANK: $2,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $2,000 · Other+23 more: $11,250 · Other+23 moreUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $8,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF CALI…Earth Overshoot Inc: $5,000 · EducationEarth Overshoot In…+1 more: $200 · EducationCOMPASSION & CHOICES: $3,000 · Civil RightsCenter for Immigration Studies Inc: $2,100 · Civil RightsAMERICARES FOUNDATION INC: $3,500 · InternationalMercy Ships International: $1,000 · International+1 more: $100 · InternationalNegative Population Growth Inc: $2,100 · Social SciencePOPULATION CONNECTION: $850 · Social ScienceCENTER VALLEY ANIMAL RESCUE: $2,500 · AnimalsBAYSIDE HOUSING & SERVICES: $2,000 · Housing & Shelter
Other$51,500Education$13,200Civil Rights$5,100International$4,600Social Science$2,950Animals$2,500Housing & Shelter$2,000

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 budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $8,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEarth Overshoot Inc: $5,000 over 5y, 2.7% of budgetWORLD POPULATION BALANCE: $4,850 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetAMERICARES FOUNDATION INC: $3,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCOMPASSION & CHOICES: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER VALLEY ANIMAL RESCUE: $2,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetGuttmacher Institute Inc: $2,200 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetCenter for Immigration Studies Inc: $2,100 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetNegative Population Growth Inc: $2,100 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetBAYSIDE HOUSING & SERVICES: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEARTH DAY TEXAS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE COLUMBIA WILLAMETTE INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUKRAINE HOUSE DC FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMercy Ships International: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPOPULATION CONNECTION: $850 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE OCEAN CLEANUP FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUSA FOR UNFPA INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCASCADE PUBLIC MEDIA: $150 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKUOW PUGET SOUND PUBLIC RADIO: $150 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFINCA INTERNATIONAL INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $100 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.

  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Earth Overshoot Inc ↗
  • Who funds WORLD POPULATION BALANCE ↗
  • Who funds AMERICARES FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds COMPASSION & CHOICES ↗
  • Who funds CENTER VALLEY ANIMAL RESCUE ↗
  • Who funds Guttmacher Institute Inc ↗
  • Who funds Center for Immigration Studies Inc ↗
  • Who funds Negative Population Growth Inc ↗
  • Who funds BAYSIDE HOUSING & SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds EARTH DAY TEXAS INC ↗
  • Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE COLUMBIA WILLAMETTE INC ↗
  • Who funds UKRAINE HOUSE DC FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Mercy Ships International ↗
  • Who funds POPULATION CONNECTION ↗
  • Who funds WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE OCEAN CLEANUP FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds USA FOR UNFPA INC ↗
  • Who funds WIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds CASCADE PUBLIC MEDIA ↗

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.

Vanguard Charitable E…Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Vanguard Charitable Endowment ProgramPA9.4× affinity6 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Human Conservation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Foundation for Human Conservation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Planned Parenthood of the Columbia Willamette Inc: 7% of income from government
  • Americares Foundation Inc: 0% of income from government
  • Wounded Warrior Project Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
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 45 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 Foundation for Human Conservation’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