Skip to content
Harder Foundation at a glance

· 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.

$1.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
44
Grants FY2025still arriving
10
States reached
$123k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Environment$7.7MAnimals$695kPublic Benefit$85kPhilanthropy$65kArts & Culture$60kRecreation & Sports$50kOther$0
02FY2025 · 44 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k33 grants · $975k
  • $50k–250k10 grants · $618k
$35,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$39M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION ED FUND$122,500
COLUMBIA RIVERKEEPER$60,000
IDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE$60,000
WILD SALMON CENTER$60,000
MONTANA WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION DBA WILD MONTANA$60,000
PEOPLE AND CARNIVORES$55,000
FUTUREWISE$50,000
ENDANGERED SPEICIES COALITION$50,000
HEART OF THE ROCKIES$50,000
EARTHJUSTICE$50,000
HEADWATERS ECONOMICS$40,000
SURFRIDER FOUNDATION$40,000
WASHINGTON COAST SUSTAINABLE SALMON FOUNDATION$40,000
COMMUNITIES FOR A HEALTHY BAY$40,000
THE ALASKA CENTER EDUCATION FUND$40,000
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 (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 93% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%IDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE: $60k → 8%MONTANA WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION DBA WILD MONTANA: $60k → 9%SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $73k → 10%COLUMBIA RIVERKEEPER: $60k → 10%WILD SALMON CENTER: $60k → 12%WASHINGTON ENVIROMENTAL COUNCIL: $145k → 9%CITIZENS FOR A HEALTHY BAY: $45k → 9%ALASKA CENTER FOR THE ENVIROMENT: $60k → 10%ENDANGERED SPEICIES COALITION: $50k → 8%IDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE: $45k → 8%SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $65k → 10%EARTHJUSTICE BOZEMAN: $100k → 10%COLUMBIA RIVERKEEPER: $60k → 10%WILD SALMON CENTER: $60k → 12%WASHINGTON ENVIROMENTAL COUNCIL: $143k → 9%ALASKA CENTER FOR THE ENVIROMENT: $50k → 10%IDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE: $45k → 8%SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $60k → 10%EARTHJUSTICE BOZEMAN: $75k → 10%COLUMBIA RIVERKEEPER: $50k → 10%WILD SALMON CENTER: $50k → 12%WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION ED FUND: $123k → 9%ALASKA CENTER FOR THE ENVIROMENT: $50k → 10%SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $55k → 10%EARTHJUSTICE: $50k → 10%WILD SALMON CENTER: $50k → 12%WASHINGTON ENVIROMENTAL COUNCIL: $90k → 9%THE ALASKA CENTER EDUCATION FUND: $50k → 10%EARTHJUSTICE: $50k → 10%WILD SALMON CENTER: $50k → 12%WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION ED FUND: $85k → 9%THE ALASKA CENTER EDUCATION FUND: $50k → 10%EARTHJUSTICE: $50k → 10%WILD SALMON CENTER: $50k → 12%WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION ED FUND: $75k → 9%WASHINGTON COAST SALMON FOUNDATION: $75k → 18%HEART OF THE ROCKIES: $70k → 9%WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION ED FUND: $60k → 9%WA COAST SUSTANABLE SALMON FOUNDATION: $60k → 18%HEART OF THE ROCKIES: $70k → 9%WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION ED FUND: $50k → 9%WA COAST SUSTANABLE SALMON FOUNDATION: $50k → 18%HEART OF THE ROCKIES: $50k → 9%HEART OF THE ROCKIES: $50k → 9%HEART OF THE ROCKIES: $50k → 9%CONSERVATION NORTHWEST: $60k → 9%FUTUREWISE: $60k → 9%FUTUREWISE: $50k → 9%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

AK
WA
ID
MT
NY
OR
CA
CO
VA
NM
NC
DC
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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$8.5M · 54 repeat orgs$323k to everyone else

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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

54
8

Total granted

$8.5M
$188k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+35%
+48%

Still filing today

83%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $135k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentAnimalsSocial SciencePhilanthropyRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • WC
    WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION EDUCATION FUND
    3× · 2020–2022 · $423k · revenue +14%
  • TS
    THE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION
    6× · 2020–2025 · $333k · revenue +15%
  • WILD SALMON CENTER
    6× · 2020–2025 · $320k · revenue +166%

Funded once

  • WC
    WASHINGTON COAST SALMON FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2023 · $75k
  • CS
    COAST SALMON FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $40k
  • THE LANDS COUNCILgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue +77%
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
Cascadia Wildlands

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…

Environment
2
Washington Forest Law Center

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.

—
3
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
4
Alaska Wildlife Alliance

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…

Environment
5
Washington Wild

Washington wild protects and restores wild lands and waters in washington state through advocacy, education and civic engagement.

Animals
6
CalWild

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.

—
7
Northwest Environmental Advocates

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.

Environment
8
Southeast Alaska Conservation Council Inc-Seacc

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…

Environment
9
Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council

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…

Environment
10
Wild Salmon Rivers

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…

Environment
11
Idaho Wildlife Federation

The Idaho Wildlife Federation (IWF) promotes the conservation of Idaho's wildlife heritage and legacy of sporting opportunities for the current and future generations.

Animals
12
Idaho Forest Restoration Partnership
Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wild Salmon Center; 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.
04the grantee network

53 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. 53 of the 68 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
14
Early backer (in before they grew)
53/53
Grantees still filing
37/53
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION EDUCATION FUND: $422,500 · EnvironmentWASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION EDUCATION FUNDTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $332,500 · EnvironmentTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATIONColumbia Riverkeeper: $305,000 · EnvironmentColumbia RiverkeeperTHE ALASKA CENTER EDUCATION FUND: $300,000 · EnvironmentTHE ALASKA CENTER EDUCATION FUNDCONSERVATION NW: $260,000 · EnvironmentTRUSTEES FOR ALASKA: $235,000 · EnvironmentHEADWATERS ECONOMICS INC: $230,000 · EnvironmentCOMMUNITIES FOR A HEALTHY BAY: $225,000 · EnvironmentFUTUREWISE: $225,000 · EnvironmentALASKA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $220,000 · EnvironmentPEOPLE AND CARNIVORES INC: $205,000 · EnvironmentCOOK INLETKEEPER: $192,500 · EnvironmentSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $180,000 · Environment+21 more: $1,655,000 · Environment+21 moreWASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION ED FUND: $392,500 · OtherWASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION ED FUNDHEART OF THE ROCKIES: $290,000 · OtherHEART OF THE ROCKIESIDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE INC: $275,000 · OtherIDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE INCWESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER: $235,000 · OtherWESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTERIndividual grant recipient: $205,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientWILDEARTH GUARDIANS: $190,000 · OtherWILDEARTH GUARDIANSMONTANA CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $185,000 · OtherMONTANA CONSERVATION VOTERS INCNW ENERGY COALITION: $135,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $127,500 · OtherFRIENDS OF THE SAN JUANS: $120,000 · OtherOREGON NATURAL DESERT ASSOCIATION: $115,000 · OtherOREGON ENVIROMENTAL COUNCIL: $115,000 · OtherWA COAST SUSTANABLE SALMON FOUNDATION: $110,000 · OtherOREGON ENVIROMENTAL CENTER: $102,500 · Other+11 more: $387,500 · Other+11 moreWILD SALMON CENTER: $320,000 · AnimalsTROUT UNLIMITED INC: $122,500 · AnimalsWASHINGTON COAST SUSTAINABLE SALMON FOUNDATION: $80,000 · AnimalsWildlife Conservation Society: $40,000 · AnimalsMONTANA WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $25,000 · AnimalsThe Pew Charitable Trusts: $85,000 · PhilanthropyTHE OREGON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $65,000 · PhilanthropyEARTH LAW CENTER: $110,000 · Social ScienceNATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION: $30,000 · Recreation & Sports
Environment$4,987,500Other$2,985,000Animals$587,500Philanthropy$150,000Social Science$110,000Recreation & Sports$30,000

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 budgetWASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION EDUCATION FUND: $422,500 over 3y, 3.4% of budgetTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $332,500 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetWILD SALMON CENTER: $320,000 over 6y, 0.8% of budgetColumbia Riverkeeper: $305,000 over 6y, 1.8% of budgetTHE ALASKA CENTER EDUCATION FUND: $300,000 over 6y, 2.0% of budgetIDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE INC: $275,000 over 6y, 1.8% of budgetCONSERVATION NW: $260,000 over 6y, 1.6% of budgetWESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER: $235,000 over 6y, 1.1% of budgetTRUSTEES FOR ALASKA: $235,000 over 6y, 2.6% of budgetHEADWATERS ECONOMICS INC: $230,000 over 6y, 1.5% of budgetCOMMUNITIES FOR A HEALTHY BAY: $225,000 over 6y, 6.9% of budgetFUTUREWISE: $225,000 over 6y, 6.2% of budgetALASKA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $220,000 over 6y, 1.5% of budgetPEOPLE AND CARNIVORES INC: $205,000 over 6y, 8.6% of budgetCOOK INLETKEEPER: $192,500 over 6y, 3.6% of budgetWILDEARTH GUARDIANS: $190,000 over 6y, 0.9% of budgetMONTANA CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $185,000 over 6y, 8.9% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $180,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE: $150,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER YELLOWSTONE COALITION: $145,000 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetNW ENERGY COALITION: $135,000 over 5y, 2.4% of budgetMONTANA WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION: $130,000 over 4y, 1.5% of budgetRESOURCE MEDIA: $130,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetTROUT UNLIMITED INC: $122,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE SAN JUANS: $120,000 over 5y, 2.3% of budgetAMERICAN RIVERS INC: $120,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetRE SOURCES: $120,000 over 6y, 1.3% of budgetOREGON NATURAL DESERT ASSOCIATION: $115,000 over 5y, 1.6% of budgetTWIN HARBORS WATERKEEPER: $112,500 over 5y, 29% of budgetEARTH LAW CENTER: $110,000 over 6y, 2.7% of budgetFuture West Inc: $105,000 over 3y, 10% of budgetThe Pew Charitable Trusts: $85,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSALMON VALLEY STEWARDSHIP INC: $85,000 over 4y, 7.7% of budgetWASHINGTON COAST SUSTAINABLE SALMON FOUNDATION: $80,000 over 2y, 4.8% of budgetSe Si Le: $80,000 over 4y, 14% of budgetSightline Institute: $75,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetPark County Environmental Council: $70,000 over 3y, 2.1% of budgetRENEWABLE ENERGY ALASKA PROJECT: $67,500 over 6y, 1.0% of budgetTHE OREGON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $65,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetOLYMPIC FOREST COALITION: $65,000 over 4y, 14% of budgetBLACKFOOT CHALLENGE INC: $60,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetAmerican Whitewater: $55,000 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetYAAK VALLEY FOREST COUNCIL: $50,000 over 2y, 6.1% of budgetTHE GLACIER-TWO MEDICINE ALLIANCE: $45,000 over 2y, 7.2% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society: $40,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE LANDS COUNCIL: $20,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetCENTER FOR RESPONSIBLE FORESTRY: $20,000 over 1y, 13% 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.

  • 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 FRIENDS OF THE SAN JUANS ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN RIVERS INC ↗
  • 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 The Pew Charitable Trusts ↗
  • Who funds SALMON VALLEY STEWARDSHIP INC ↗

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.

PatagoniaorgWilburforce FoundationThe Bullitt FoundationSeattle FoundationResources Legacy FundThe Northwest Fund fo…The Burning FoundationThe Rose Foundation f…Western Conservation …Tortuga Charitable Fo…The Kendeda FundThe Hugh and Jane Fer…
PatagoniaorgCA55.3× affinity27 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 Harder Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Harder Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
  • 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
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
12report 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 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.

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 68 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Harder’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