Skip to content

· Private foundation

Granite Ridge Nature Institute

Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$40k
Granted FY2023
17
Grants FY2023
10
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it funds
01FY2023 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,054
Median grant
10
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Wild Earth Guardians$5,000
Orangutan Foundation International$5,000
African Parks Foundation of America$5,000
Turtle Island Restoration Network$5,000
Friends of the Earth$4,000
Individual grant recipient$4,000
Friends of Bonobos$3,000
Bonobo Conservation Initiative$2,921
the Oasis Sanctuary$1,054
Giraffe Conservation Foundation$1,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
Bonobo Conservation Initiative$1,000
Nova Ukraine$1,000
WildEarth Guardians$500
Individual grant recipient$75
02The need
02

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 (FY23–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 72% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%the Oasis Sanctuary: $1k → 18%Arbor Day Foundation: $50 → 13%Nova Ukraine: $1k → 8%Turtle Island Restoration Network: $5k → 8%Orangutan Foundation International: $5k → 14%Cornell Lab of Ornithology: $60 → 16%African Parks Foundation of America: $5k → 17%Wild Earth Guardians: $5k → 12%Bonobo Conservation Initiative: $3k → 14%Giraffe Conservation Foundation: $1k → 13%Triangle Land Conservation: $1k → 11%Born Free: $4k → 8%WildEarth Guardians: $500 → 12%National Geographic: $75 → 14%Friends of Bonobos: $3k → 11%Bonobo Conservation Initiative: $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

NY
CA
NE
VA
MD
AZ
NM
NC
DC
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 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
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
2
San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory

The San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory is dedicated to the conservation of birds and their habitats through science and outreach.

Environment
3
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.

Animals
4
Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International Inc

The Fossey Fund is dedicated to the conservation and study of gorillas in Africa through a successful, people-centered approach: 1) Providing daily protection to gorillas, 2) Scientific research providing critical data on gorillas and…

—
5
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
6
Eden Peopleplanet

To offer the dignity of fair employment to people living in impoverished communities, who become transformational agents of global forest restoration.

International
7
National Tropical Botanical Garden

To enrich life by perpetuating tropical plants, ecosystems and cultural heritage through discovery, scientific research, conservation, and education.

Environment
8
Asociacion Interamericana Para La Defensa Del Ambiente

To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.

Crime & Legal
9
Global Forest Generation

Global Forest Generation restores and protects forest ecosystems in partnership with grassroots leaders and local communities across vast landscapes which play a critical role in preserving water, protecting biodiversity, storing carbon,…

Environment
10
Natural Areas Conservancy Inc

The natural areas conservancy champions urban natural areas in new york city and across the nation through innovative research, partnerships, and advocacy. we increase the health and resilience of urban forests and wetlands, catalyze…

Environment
11
Oikonos - Ecosystem Knowledge

Oikonos studies and protects imperiled ecosystems by engaging diverse communities through innovative scientific and artistic collaborations.

Science & Tech
12
Wildlife Conservation Global Inc

Wildlife conservation global, inc. operates the okapi conservation project (ocp) which works in the democratic republic of the congo with the institute in congo for the conservation of nature (iccn) and local communities throughout the…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is African Parks Foundation of America; the most unlike its peers is Nova Ukraine. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

10 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. 10 of the 15 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WILDEARTH GUARDIANS: $5,500 · OtherWILDEARTH GUARDIANSORANGUTAN FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL: $5,000 · OtherORANGUTAN FOUNDATION INTERNATIONALIndividual grant recipient: $4,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientGiraffe Conservation Foundation: $1,000 · OtherGiraffe Conservation FoundationIndividual grant recipient: $1,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+2 more: $135 · OtherTURTLE ISLAND RESTORATION NETWORK: $5,000 · EnvironmentTURTLE ISLAND RESTORATION…FRIENDS OF THE EARTH: $4,000 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE EARTH+1 more: $50 · EnvironmentBONOBO CONSERVATION INITIATIVE: $3,921 · AnimalsBONOBO CONSERVATION IN…FRIENDS OF BONOBOS: $3,000 · AnimalsFRIENDS OF BONOBOSOASIS SANCTUARY FOUNDATION LTD: $1,054 · AnimalsOASIS SANCTUARY FOUNDA…AFRICAN PARKS FOUNDATION OF AMERICA: $5,000 · Recreation & SportsAFRICAN PARKS …NOVA UKRAINE: $1,000 · International
Other$16,635Environment$9,050Animals$7,975Recreation & Sports$5,000International$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWILDEARTH GUARDIANS: $5,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTURTLE ISLAND RESTORATION NETWORK: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAFRICAN PARKS FOUNDATION OF AMERICA: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetORANGUTAN FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE EARTH: $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBONOBO CONSERVATION INITIATIVE: $3,921 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetFRIENDS OF BONOBOS: $3,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetOASIS SANCTUARY FOUNDATION LTD: $1,054 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNOVA UKRAINE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION: $50 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.

Network for GoodDC9.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Network for Good · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Granite Ridge Nature Institute funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Granite Ridge Nature Institute. 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%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 15 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Granite Ridge Nature Institute’s filings →

    More from the funding graph