· Private foundation
Gwydion Fund for Wild Nature
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k5 grants · $23k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $45k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $388k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NATURAL HISTORY INSTITUTE | $212,500 |
| HATCH | $125,000 |
| THE PAD PROJECT | $50,000 |
| CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC | $25,000 |
| PRESCOTT FILM SOCIETY | $20,000 |
| LAUNCH PAD TEEN CENTER | $5,000 |
| COLORADO PLATEAU FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| WOLF CONSERVATION CENTER | $5,000 |
| GLOBAL GREENGRANTS FUND | $5,000 |
| WILDERNESS WATCH | $3,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY22–23, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those 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.
48 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 41 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $145k 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
- NHNatural History Institute4× · 2020–2024 · $900k · revenue +3% · 68% of their budget
- TPThe Pad Project3× · 2022–2024 · $158k · revenue +15%
- GIGREENPEACE INC4× · 2020–2023 · $55k · revenue +10%
Funded once
- HPHATCH PLASTIC PREVENTIONone grant, 2020 · $15k
- SASOUTHEAST ALASKA PRESERVATION COUNCILone grant, 2020 · $13k
- AWALASKA WILDERNESS LEAGUEone grant, 2020 · $13k · revenue -22%
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.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.
The California Wilderness Coalition protects the natural landscapes that make California unique, providing clean air and water, a home to wildlife, and a place for recreation and spiritual renewal.
Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…
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.
Rainforest Action Network (RAN) works toward a world where the rights and dignity of all communities are respected and where healthy forests, a stable climate and wild biodiversity are protected and celebrated.
Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.
Wildlands Network works to reconnect, restore and rewild North America so that life-in all its diversity-can thrive.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Stand and the most unlike its peers is Prescott Film Society. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 33 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 28% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 16% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
64 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. 64 of the 75 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 Natural History Institute ↗
- Who funds The Pad Project ↗
- Who funds HATCH ↗
- Who funds GREENPEACE INC ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds PRESCOTT COLLEGE INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds OCEAN CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW INC ↗
- Who funds The 5 Gyres Institute ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL ARIZONA LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds AMBOSELI TRUST FOR ELEPHANTS ↗
- Who funds THE GRAND CANYON TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds Earth Island Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds The Launch Pad Teen Center ↗
- Who funds SITKA CONSERVATION SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds WOLF CONSERVATION CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Prescott Film Society ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN RIVERS INC ↗
- Who funds Defenders of Wildlife ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE VERDE RIVER ↗
- Who funds COLORADO PLATEAU FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ALASKA WILDERNESS LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds Eyak Preservation Council dba Cultural Defense Fund ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL GREENGRANTS FUND ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Oak Creek Watershed Council ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF WRITERS INC ↗
- Who funds COLLECTIVE HERITAGE INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds LOCAL FIRST ARIZONA FOUNDATION ↗
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: Arizona Community Foundation · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Patagoniaorg · Impactassetsinc · The Swf Immersion Foundation · Frankel Family Foundation · Tides Foundation · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Orange County Community Foundation
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 Gwydion Fund for Wild Nature 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.
- Enterprise Community Partners Inc — 22% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Gwydion Fund for Wild Nature?
Find your warmest path to Gwydion Fund for Wild Nature 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.