Skip to content
Friends of the Earth (Action) Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· 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.

$61k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$15k
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Public Benefit$270kCivil Rights$120kEnvironment$82k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $49,250, the rows itemized in this filing. The $60,750 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $11,500 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 $10k2 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $35k
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
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 (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 56% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%SIERRA CLUB: $10k → 10%WORKING FAMILIES PARTY NATIONAL PAC: $15k → 20%BLACK MALE VOTER PROJECT: $50k → 14%NEW FLORIDA VISION PAC: $6k → 15%JUSTICE DEMOCRATS PAC: $55k → 12%BLACK VOTERS MATTER FUND: $25k → 13%PEOPLE AND POLLINATORS ACTION NETWORK: $10k → 12%NEW VIRGINIA MAJORITY: $15k → 9%MARYLAND PESTICIDE EDUCATION NETWORK: $15k → 6%MARYLAND PESTICIDE EDUCATION NETWORK: $8k → 19%WORKING FAMILIES PARTY NATIONAL PAC: $10k → 20%BLACK MALE VOTER PROJECT: $25k → 14%JUSTICE DEMOCRATS PAC: $50k → 12%NEW GEORGIA PROJECT ACTION FUND: $50k → 13%MD TOGETHER WE RISE PAC: $10k → 19%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $15k → 14%JUSTICE DEMOCRATS PAC: $25k → 12%FRIENDS OF THE EARTH: $8k → 14%JUSTICE DEMOCRATS PAC: $6k → 12%DEMOCRACY INITIATIVE: $7k → 14%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $6k → 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

MN
NY
CA
CO
VA
MD
TN
DC
GA
FL
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.

59%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$280k · 5 repeat orgs$192k to everyone else

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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
10

Total granted

$280k
$164k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
0%

Still filing today

40%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 43% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $28k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationCivil RightsEnvironmentOther
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

  • JD
    JUSTICE DEMOCRATS PAC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $136k
  • BM
    BLACK MALE VOTER PROJECT
    2× · 2020–2021 · $75k
  • WF
    WORKING FAMILIES PARTY NATIONAL PAC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $25k

Funded once

  • NG
    NEW GEORGIA PROJECT ACTION FUND
    one grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue 0%
  • BV
    Black Voters Matter Fund Inc
    one grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue -9%
  • PF
    PERIELLO FOR GOVERNOR
    one grant, 2017 · $25k
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
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
2
Protect Colorados Vote

To oppose a colorado statewide ballot initiative to join the national popular vote compact

—
3
Fresh Energy

Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.

Environment
4
The Ohio Environmental Council

To protect the environment and health of all ohio communities through legal and policy advocacy, decision-maker accountability, and civic engagement.

Environment
5
Environment Now
—
6
Ecological Solutions

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.

Environment
7
Move to Amend

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…

Civil Rights
8
Common Cause

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,…

—
9
Action Tn

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…

—
10
Third Way

To research and develop centrist policy ideas.

Civil Rights
11
Project Drawdown

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;…

Education
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is League of Conservation Voters Inc; 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.
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 18 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/11
Grantees still filing
1/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JUSTICE DEMOCRATS PAC: $135,800 · OtherJUSTICE DEMOCRATS PACBLACK MALE VOTER PROJECT: $75,000 · OtherBLACK MALE VOTER PROJECTNEW GEORGIA PROJECT ACTION FUND: $50,000 · OtherNEW GEORGIA PROJECT ACTION FUNDBlack Voters Matter Fund Inc: $25,000 · OtherBlack Voters Matter Fund IncPERIELLO FOR GOVERNOR: $25,000 · OtherPERIELLO FOR GOVERNORWORKING FAMILIES PARTY NATIONAL PAC: $25,000 · OtherWORKING FAMILIES PARTY NATIONAL PAC+6 more: $48,720 · Other+6 moreLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $21,250 · Civil RightsNEW VIRGINIA MAJORITY: $15,000 · Civil RightsMARYLAND PESTICIDE EDUCATION NETWORK INC: $23,000 · EducationINDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK: $10,000 · EducationPEOPLE AND POLLINATORS ACTION NETWORK: $10,000 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE EARTH: $8,000 · Environment
Other$384,520Civil Rights$36,250Education$33,000Environment$18,000

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 budgetBLACK MALE VOTER PROJECT: $75,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetNEW GEORGIA PROJECT ACTION FUND: $50,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetBlack Voters Matter Fund Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMARYLAND PESTICIDE EDUCATION NETWORK INC: $23,000 over 2y, 6.5% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $21,250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNEW VIRGINIA MAJORITY: $15,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSIERRA CLUB: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPEOPLE AND POLLINATORS ACTION NETWORK: $10,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetINDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE EARTH: $8,000 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.

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.

All Hands on Deck Net…Tides AdvocacyWomen Donors Network …Way to Win Action Fun…America VotesTides FoundationSixteen Thirty Fund
All Hands on Deck Network IncMA15.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 Friends of the Earth (Action) Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Friends of the Earth (Action) Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–5%
    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 18 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 Friends of the Earth (Action)’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