· Public charity
Friends of the Earth (Action) Inc
To improve the environment through education and policy work, with an emphasis on pollution, climate change, and energy issues; and how congress and the administration stand on these issues.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 5 grants below total $49,250 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $60,750 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $11,500 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k2 grants · $14k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $35k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MARYLAND PESTICIDE EDUCATION NETWORK | $15,000 |
| SIERRA CLUB | $10,000 |
| PEOPLE AND POLLINATORS ACTION NETWORK | $10,000 |
| FRIENDS OF THE EARTH | $8,000 |
| LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC | $6,250 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 56% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
5 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 43% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $28k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- JDJUSTICE DEMOCRATS PAC3× · 2022–2024 · $136k
- BMBLACK MALE VOTER PROJECT2× · 2020–2021 · $75k
- WFWORKING FAMILIES PARTY NATIONAL PAC2× · 2022–2023 · $25k
Funded once
- NGNEW GEORGIA PROJECT ACTION FUNDone grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue 0%
- BVBlack Voters Matter Fund Incone grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue -9%
- PFPERIELLO FOR GOVERNORone grant, 2017 · $25k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
To oppose a colorado statewide ballot initiative to join the national popular vote compact
Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.
To protect the environment and health of all ohio communities through legal and policy advocacy, decision-maker accountability, and civic engagement.
The center for voter engagement project works to educate voters on changes in voting laws in ca & encourage engagement in our democratic processes. volunteer partipation in public outreach.
Move to Amend is a coalition of hundreds of organizations and hundreds of thousands of individuals committed to social and economic justice, ending corporate rule, and building a vibrant democracy that is genuinely accountable to the…
With offices in washington d.c. and 25 states and 1.5 million supporters and activists, common cause works to advance democracy reforms at federal, state, and local levels, through drafting model legislation, lobbying, public engagement,…
Action tn is dedicated to helping grassroots groups across tennessee expand and coordinate their civic and political engagement efforts in service of building power around our shared values, with a particular focus on empowering…
To research and develop centrist policy ideas.
Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…
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.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is League of Conservation Voters Inc and the most unlike its peers is Indigenous Environmental Network. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
11 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 11 of the 18 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds BLACK MALE VOTER PROJECT ↗
- Who funds NEW GEORGIA PROJECT ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds Black Voters Matter Fund Inc ↗
- Who funds MARYLAND PESTICIDE EDUCATION NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC ↗
- Who funds NEW VIRGINIA MAJORITY ↗
- Who funds INDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE AND POLLINATORS ACTION NETWORK ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE EARTH ↗
- Who funds DEMOCRACY INITIATIVE ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Tides Advocacy · Women Donors Network Action · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · America Votes · Tides Foundation · Sixteen Thirty Fund
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Friends of the Earth (Action) Inc funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.