Skip to content
Global Warming Mitigation Project at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Global Warming Mitigation Project

Awarding the keeling curve prize to organizations or individuals who make a substantial impact in efforts to mitigate global warming as it affects the united states and elsewhere.

$626k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through 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.

Environment$1.2M
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $250,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $626,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $376,000 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.
$50,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$864k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BLUE FOREST$50,000
CLIMATIZE$50,000
BIOSORRA$50,000
ITSELECTRIC$50,000
ISLA URBANA$50,000
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 10%. 87% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Sanergy Inc: $50k → 10%EV Match: $25k → 7%Enzinc: $25k → 8%Natal Energy Inc: $25k → 10%Nitricity Inc: $25k → 10%Citizen's Climate Education: $25k → 11%BLUE FOREST: $50k → 12%CLIMATIZE: $50k → 13%Symbrosia Inc: $25k → 15%Cornell University: $13k → 16%Air Company: $25k → 17%Clip Bike Inc: $25k → 20%Solar Sister Inc: $25k → 14%Clean Energy Works: $25k → 8%Health In Harmony: $50k → 12%BIOSORRA: $50k → 11%Educated Choices Program Inc: $25k → 9%Savory Instituteorg Inc: $25k → 12%Bridges to Prosperity: $25k → 12%MEETS Accelerator Coalition: $25k → 9%Lanza Tech Inc: $25k → 14%Global Water Challenge: $25k → 7%BasiGo Inc: $25k → 10%Opus 12 Inc: $25k → 10%Standearth: $50k → 10%Wildcoast: $25k → 11%Solar Cookers International: $25k → 12%C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group Inc: $50k → 17%GreenMax Capital Advisors: $25k → 20%World Resources Institute: $25k → 14%Our Climate Education Fund: $25k → 12%Waste to Energy Partners LLC Boulder Industries: $25k → 12%New Energy Nexus: $25k → 10%Project Vesta PBC: $50k → 10%ISLA URBANA: $50k → 11%ITSELECTRIC: $50k → 20%Odyssey Energy Solutions: $25k → 12%WattTime Corporation: $25k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
IL
NY
OR
CA
CO
VA
DE
NC
DC
HI
GA

Grants abroad, by region: $250k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

South America$100k · 40% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CLIMATE CHANGE

North America (Canada and Mexico)$100k · 40% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CLIMATE CHANGE

South Asia$50k · 20% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CLIMATE CHANGE

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its 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
Climate Catalyst Inc

Climate catalyst sparks collective action to tackle the biggest climate challenges we face today: cutting emissions in heavy industries.

Environment
2
Climate Foundation

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

Science & Tech
3
Climate Breakthrough Inc

To launch breakthrough climate mitigation efforts by identifying, supporting, and unleashing innovative leaders with transformative strategies.

Human Services
4
Cascade Climate Inc

To accelerate progress in interventions that harness Earths natural systems to stabilize the climate.

Environment
5
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
6
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
7
Climate Innovation Action Inc

To educate policymakers about climate policies generally and to directly advocate for specific legislation on climate change.

Environment
8
Work on Climate

Supporting industry transformation towards climate-positive and make green careers transitions and driving the adoption of green workforce development practices broadly.

Environment
9
Sustainable World Inc

See schedule o part i for description of the organizations mission.

Environment
10
Terraset

Terraset uses philanthropic capital to purchase permanent, high-quality carbon removal. we pool donations from individuals, foundations, family offices, and donor advised funds, and make strategic purchases of high-quality carbon removal…

Environment
11
The Climate Group Inc

Climate group advances climate action by mobilizing business and government leadership to drive systemic decarbonization across energy, transport, and industry, while engaging the public through large-scale convenings and global platforms.…

Environment
12
Environment Next Inc

Environment next supports individuals, nonprofits and businesses around the world on solutions to complex climate issues. we provide leadership, outreach and communication support, grants, and investments to empower leaders and their ideas…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is World Resources Institute; the most unlike its peers is Isla Urbana Inc. 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

20 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. 20 of the 39 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/20
Grantees still filing
16/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BIOSORRA: $50,000 · OtherBIOSORRAITSELECTRIC: $50,000 · OtherITSELECTRICSanergy Inc: $50,000 · OtherSanergy IncCLIMATIZE: $50,000 · OtherCLIMATIZEPROJECT VESTA PBC: $50,000 · OtherPROJECT VESTA PBCLanzaTech Inc: $25,000 · OtherWaste to Energy Partners LLC Boulder Industries: $25,000 · OtherEnzinc: $25,000 · OtherNatal Energy Inc: $25,000 · OtherAir Company: $25,000 · OtherSYMBROSIA INC: $25,000 · OtherClip Bike Inc: $25,000 · OtherNITRICITY INC: $25,000 · OtherOPUS 12 INC: $25,000 · OtherMEETS Accelerator Coalition: $25,000 · OtherCLEAN ENERGY WORKS INC: $25,000 · OtherOdyssey Energy Solutions Inc: $25,000 · OtherGreenMax Capital Advisors: $25,000 · OtherBasiGo Inc: $25,000 · OtherEVMATCH INC: $25,000 · OtherC40 Cities Climate Leadership Group Inc: $50,000 · EnvironmentC40 Cities Climate Leadership Group…Isla Urbana Inc: $50,000 · EnvironmentIsla Urbana IncBLUE FOREST FINANCE INC: $50,000 · EnvironmentBLUE FOREST FINANCE INCSTAND: $50,000 · EnvironmentSTANDSAVORY INSTITUTEORG INC: $25,000 · EnvironmentSAVORY INSTITUTEORG INCCITIZENS CLIMATE EDUCATION CORP: $25,000 · EnvironmentCITIZENS CLIMATE EDUCATION CORPSolar Cookers International: $25,000 · EnvironmentSolar Cookers InternationalWILDCOAST: $25,000 · EnvironmentWILDCOASTGLOBAL WATER CHALLENGE: $25,000 · EnvironmentGLOBAL WATER CHALLENGEOUR CLIMATE EDUCATION FUND: $25,000 · EnvironmentOUR CLIMATE EDUCATION FUNDCalCef Innovations: $25,000 · EnvironmentCalCef InnovationsPOLLINATE GROUP: $25,000 · InternationalPOLLINATE…WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $25,000 · InternationalWORLD RES…SOLAR SISTER INC: $25,000 · InternationalSOLAR SIS…BRIDGES TO PROSPERITY INC: $25,000 · InternationalBRIDGES T…Health in Harmony: $50,000 · HealthEDUCATED CHOICES PROGRAM INC: $25,000 · EducationCornell University: $12,500 · EducationWATTTIME CORPORATION: $25,000 · Science & Tech
Other$625,000Environment$375,000International$100,000Health$50,000Education$37,500Science & Tech$25,000

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 budgetC40 Cities Climate Leadership Group Inc: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHealth in Harmony: $50,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetIsla Urbana Inc: $50,000 over 1y, 26% of budgetBLUE FOREST FINANCE INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetSTAND: $50,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSAVORY INSTITUTEORG INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetPOLLINATE GROUP: $25,000 over 1y, 28% of budgetCITIZENS CLIMATE EDUCATION CORP: $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSolar Cookers International: $25,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetWILDCOAST: $25,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetWORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEDUCATED CHOICES PROGRAM INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetGLOBAL WATER CHALLENGE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSOLAR SISTER INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetBRIDGES TO PROSPERITY INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetOUR CLIMATE EDUCATION FUND: $25,000 over 1y, 9.2% of budgetCalCef Innovations: $25,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetWATTTIME CORPORATION: $25,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetCornell University: $12,500 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.

Climateworks Foundati…ImpactassetsincRsf Social Finance IncTides FoundationNew Venture FundResources Legacy FundSilicon Valley Commun…The Rockefeller Found…The David and Lucile …California Community …National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…
Climateworks FoundationCA17.6× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Climateworks Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Tides Foundation · New Venture Fund · Resources Legacy Fund · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The Rockefeller Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · California Community Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment 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 Global Warming Mitigation Project funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Global Warming Mitigation Project. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Global Warming Mitigation Project?

    Find your warmest path to Global Warming Mitigation Project 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 39 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 Global Warming Mitigation Project’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