· Private foundation
Harder Foundation
Its FY2025 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 FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $8k
- $10k–50k33 grants · $975k
- $50k–250k10 grants · $618k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION ED FUND | $122,500 |
| WILD SALMON CENTER | $60,000 |
| MONTANA WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION DBA WILD MONTANA | $60,000 |
| COLUMBIA RIVERKEEPER | $60,000 |
| IDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE | $60,000 |
| PEOPLE AND CARNIVORES | $55,000 |
| FUTUREWISE | $50,000 |
| HEART OF THE ROCKIES | $50,000 |
| ENDANGERED SPEICIES COALITION | $50,000 |
| EARTHJUSTICE | $50,000 |
| HEADWATERS ECONOMICS | $40,000 |
| CONSERVATION NORTHWEST | $40,000 |
| OREGON ENVIROMENTAL COUNCIL | $40,000 |
| COMMUNITIES FOR A HEALTHY BAY | $40,000 |
| THE ALASKA CENTER EDUCATION FUND | $40,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 93% of your 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.
54 repeat relationships — 39 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $135k 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
- WCWASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION EDUCATION FUND3× · 2020–2022 · $423k · revenue +14%
- TSTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION6× · 2020–2025 · $333k · revenue +15%
WILD SALMON CENTER6× · 2020–2025 · $320k · revenue +166%
Funded once
- WCWASHINGTON COAST SALMON FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · $75k
- CSCOAST SALMON FOUNDATIONone grant, 2022 · $40k
THE LANDS COUNCILgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue +77%
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.
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…
Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.
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…
Support ecosystem-based wildlife management by increasing public awareness of wildlife issues, responding to information requests, advocating for science-based wildlife habitat management through proposal and comment submissions, and…
Washington wild protects and restores wild lands and waters in washington state through advocacy, education and civic engagement.
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.
Work through advocacy and education to use federal environmental laws such as the Clean Water Act to protect and restore water quality and habit in the Pacific Northwest and nationwide.
SEACC's mission is to protect the special places of the world's largest temperate rainforest, promote conservation, and advocate for sustainability in human use of natural resources. Inspired by the land, wildlife, cultures, and…
The Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council is a local nonprofit organization that strives to enhance and restore habitat for fish and wildlife our community and for future generations. Our Board of Directors consists of seven members with…
To conserve functioning salmon/steelhead eco-system at watershed levels, integrate angling activities with basic scientific research, collect raw data, monitor environmental functions, salmon/steelhead population dynamics, public…
The Idaho Wildlife Federation (IWF) promotes the conservation of Idaho's wildlife heritage and legacy of sporting opportunities for the current and future generations.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wild Salmon Center and the most unlike its peers is The Glacier-Two Medicine Alliance. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 33 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
53 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. 53 of the 68 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 WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds THE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WILD SALMON CENTER ↗
- Who funds Columbia Riverkeeper ↗
- Who funds THE ALASKA CENTER EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds IDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE INC ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION NW ↗
- Who funds WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES FOR ALASKA ↗
- Who funds HEADWATERS ECONOMICS INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITIES FOR A HEALTHY BAY ↗
- Who funds FUTUREWISE ↗
- Who funds ALASKA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE AND CARNIVORES INC ↗
- Who funds COOK INLETKEEPER ↗
- Who funds WILDEARTH GUARDIANS ↗
- Who funds MONTANA CONSERVATION VOTERS INC ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds GREATER YELLOWSTONE COALITION ↗
- Who funds NW ENERGY COALITION ↗
- Who funds MONTANA WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds RESOURCE MEDIA ↗
- Who funds TROUT UNLIMITED INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN RIVERS INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE SAN JUANS ↗
- Who funds RE SOURCES ↗
- Who funds OREGON NATURAL DESERT ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds TWIN HARBORS WATERKEEPER ↗
- Who funds EARTH LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds Future West Inc ↗
- Who funds SALMON VALLEY STEWARDSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds The Pew Charitable Trusts ↗
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: Patagoniaorg · Wilburforce Foundation · The Bullitt Foundation · Seattle Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · The Northwest Fund for the Environment · The Burning Foundation · The Rose Foundation for Communities the Environment · Western Conservation Foundation · Tortuga Charitable Foundation · The Kendeda Fund · The Hugh and Jane Ferguson 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 Harder Foundation 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.
- Wild Salmon Center — 49% of income from government
- Oregon Natural Desert Association — 9% of income from government
- American Whitewater — 5% of income from government
- The Oregon Community Foundation — 2% of income from government
- Columbia Riverkeeper — 1% 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 Harder Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Harder Foundation 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.