Skip to content
Global Water Challenge at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Global Water Challenge

To accelerate universal access to clean water, sanitation and hygiene around the world.

$4.5M
Granted FY2023
5
Grants FY2023
4
States reached
$95k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through 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, FY2017 to 2023.

Environment$553kInternational$55kPhilanthropy$21kHealth$5k
02FY2023 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $301,725, the rows itemized in this filing. The $4,532,313 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $4,230,588 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 · FY2023

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $277k
$62,500
Median grant
4
States reached
$20M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TEXAN BY NATURE$95,000
RIVER PARTNERS$62,500
OHIO RIVER FOUNDATION$62,500
KANSAS ALLIANCE FOR WETLANDS AND STREAMS$56,725
LAKE MERRITT INSTITUTE$25,000
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 (FY17–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 54% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%LAKE MERRITT INSTITUTE: $25k → 10%DIGDEEP: $20k → 14%RIVER PARTNERS: $63k → 18%BLACK WOMEN'S BLUEPRINT: $5k → 16%TEXAN BY NATURE: $95k → 10%WATER FINANCE EXCHANGE INC: $25k → 14%KANSAS ALLIANCE FOR WETLANDS AND STREAMS: $57k → 10%THE CHRIS LONG FOUNDATION: $11k → 11%THREE RIVERS LAND TRUST: $10k → 15%WATER FOR PEOPLE: $12k → 12%OHIO RIVER FOUNDATION: $63k → 16%INTERNATIONAL WATER INSTITUTE: $50k → 12%GLOBAL GRASSROOTS: $11k → 5%LAKE MERRITT INSTITUTE: $25k → 10%MILLENNIUM WATER ALLIANCE: $43k → 14%KANSAS ALLIANCE FOR WETLANDS AND STREAMS: $50k → 10%THE CHRIS LONG FOUNDATION: $10k → 11%OHIO RIVER FOUNDATION: $50k → 16%THE CHRIS LONG FOUNDATION: $10k → 11%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

NH
ND
NY
OH
CA
CO
MO
KS
NC
DC
TX

Grants abroad, by region: $4.5M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 7 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$2.4M · 54% · 35 grants

Stated purpose: INCLUSIVE SUSTAINABLE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES

South America$883k · 20% · 17 grants

Stated purpose: INCLUSIVE SUSTAINABLE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$653k · 15% · 9 grants

Stated purpose: INCLUSIVE SUSTAINABLE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES

Middle East and North Africa$235k · 5% · 5 grants

Stated purpose: INCLUSIVE SUSTAINABLE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES

Russia and Neighboring States$183k · 4% · 5 grants

Stated purpose: INCLUSIVE SUSTAINABLE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES

South Asia$81k · 2% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: INCLUSIVE SUSTAINABLE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES

North America (Canada and Mexico)$31k · 1% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: INCLUSIVE SUSTAINABLE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES

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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

47%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$300k · 4 repeat orgs$333k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2023, 1 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
8

Total granted

$300k
$176k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-2%
+42%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 48% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $158k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23
EnvironmentCivil RightsArts & CulturePhilanthropyInternationalOther
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

  • OR
    Ohio River Foundation
    3× · 2022–2024 · $113k · revenue -2%
  • KA
    KANSAS ALLIANCE FOR WETLANDS AND STREAMS INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $107k · revenue -5%
  • LM
    Lake Merritt Institute
    2× · 2022–2023 · $50k · revenue +24%

Funded once

  • IW
    INTERNATIONAL WATER INSTITUTEgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue +35%
  • MW
    MILLENNIUM WATER ALLIANCEgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $43k · revenue +44%
  • WF
    WATER FINANCE EXCHANGE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue ×17
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
International Rivers Network

International Rivers protects rivers and defends the rights of communities that depend on them.

Environment
2
Western Resource Advocates

Western Resource Advocates (WRA) is a regional nonprofit advocacy organization fighting climate change and its impacts to sustain the environment, economy, and people of the West. As the region's go-to experts for more than three decades,…

Crime & Legal
3
Broad Water Innovations

Conservation easement holder and long-term steward of wetland, stream, and species mitigation banks.

Environment
4
The Center for Water Security and Cooperation

To advance water security by understanding, evaluating and innovating in water law and governance.

Environment
5
Water to Thrive

Water to Thrive transforms lives in rural Africa by working with partners and beneficiaries to bring the blessing of clean, safe water, connecting communities in need with supporters who have the heart and spirit to make a difference

International
6
America's Watershed Initiative

America's watershed initiative serves as a trusted voice that brings partners together and champions sound science to secure a future in which the rivers and people of the mississippi river watershed thrive.

Human Services
7
Water Environment Federation

WEF's mission is inspiring the water community in pursuit of human and environmental well-being. WEF is a global environmental leader committed to water quality education and technical best practices. WEF connects water professionals;…

Environment
8
Waterorg

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

International
9
Western Rivers Conservancy

Western rivers conservancy's mission is to protect outstanding river ecosystems in the western united states. continued on schedule o.we acquire land to conserve critical habitat, provide public access for compatible use and enjoyment, and…

Environment
10
Open Water Foundation

The Open Water Foundation develops and supports open source software and open data solutions to make better decisions about water resources.

Environment
11
Well Aware Inc

Well Aware's mission is to provide innovative and sustainable solutions to water scarcity and contamination in East Africa.

International
12
Washington Water Trust

Wwt's mission is to protect and restore water in rivers and streams across washington state. washington water trust restores and protects water in rivers and streams and promotes sustainable freshwater management in washington, and, more…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is River Partners; the most unlike its peers is National Audubon Society 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

16 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
11/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Ohio River Foundation: $112,500 · EnvironmentOhio River FoundationKANSAS ALLIANCE FOR WETLANDS AND STREAMS INC: $106,725 · EnvironmentKANSAS ALLIANCE FOR WETLANDS AND STREAMS INCTaking Care of Texas: $95,000 · EnvironmentTaking Care of TexasRIVER PARTNERS: $62,500 · EnvironmentRIVER PARTNERSLake Merritt Institute: $50,000 · EnvironmentLake Merritt InstituteINTERNATIONAL WATER INSTITUTE: $50,000 · EnvironmentINTERNATIONAL WATER INSTITUTEWATER FINANCE EXCHANGE INC: $25,000 · EnvironmentTHE DIGDEEP RIGHT TO WATER PROJECT: $20,000 · Environment+1 more: $10,000 · EnvironmentMILLENNIUM WATER ALLIANCE: $42,763 · Arts & CultureCHRIS LONG FOUNDATION: $31,000 · PhilanthropyGLOBAL GRASSROOTS: $11,000 · Civil RightsTHE RECONCILIATION CENTER INC: $5,000 · Civil RightsWATER FOR PEOPLE: $12,000 · International
Environment$531,725Arts & Culture$42,763Philanthropy$31,000Civil Rights$16,000International$12,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetOhio River Foundation: $112,500 over 3y, 12% of budgetKANSAS ALLIANCE FOR WETLANDS AND STREAMS INC: $106,725 over 3y, 3.4% of budgetTaking Care of Texas: $95,000 over 2y, 2.7% of budgetRIVER PARTNERS: $62,500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetLake Merritt Institute: $50,000 over 2y, 10% of budgetINTERNATIONAL WATER INSTITUTE: $50,000 over 1y, 4.8% of budgetMILLENNIUM WATER ALLIANCE: $42,763 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetCHRIS LONG FOUNDATION: $31,000 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetWATER FINANCE EXCHANGE INC: $25,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetTHE DIGDEEP RIGHT TO WATER PROJECT: $20,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetWATER FOR PEOPLE: $12,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGLOBAL GRASSROOTS: $11,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetTHREE RIVERS LAND TRUST INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE RECONCILIATION CENTER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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.

National Fish and Wil…The Blackbaud Giving …Paypal Charitable Giv…Donor Advised Charita…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Fish and Wildlife FoundationDC14.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Global Water Challenge funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Global Water Challenge. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%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
    5report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Global Water Challenge?

    Find your warmest path to Global Water Challenge 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 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $5.0M of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Global Water Challenge’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