Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Public charity

Holdfast Trust

Fighting the environmental crisis by raising awareness of the current environmental crisis; protecting biodiversity and climate resilience through land preservation and restoration; defending and supporting democracy and environmental activism; lobbying and other advocacy in support of these issues; and making grants to other nonprofit…

$7.5M
Granted FY2022
17
Grants FY2022
10
States reached
$3.1M
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

77% of Holdfast Trust’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Marin Community Foundation, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 9 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2022, the last year Holdfast Trust named its own grantees at scale: 17 organizations, $7M. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

17
’22
9
’23
9
’24

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2022–2024.

Environment$77MPublic Benefit$325kCivil Rights$225kHuman Services$75k
02FY2022 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2022

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $50k
  • $50k–250k12 grants · $725k
  • $250k+3 grants · $6.7M
$50,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$1.4B
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE CONSERVATION FUND$3,100,000
REWILD$2,900,000
NORTHEAST WILDERNESS TRUST CORPORATION$700,000
SENATE MAJORITY PAC$100,000
HOUSE MAJORITY PAC$100,000
GEORGIA INVESTOR ACTION FUND INC$75,000
CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS ACTION FUND$50,000
ENVIRONMENTAL VOTER PROJECT INC$50,000
BLACK VOTERS MATTER FUND INC$50,000
THE VOTER PROJECT$50,000
JANE FONDA CLIMATE PAC$50,000
TAKE ACTION MINNESOTA$50,000
NEXTGEN CLIMATE ACTION$50,000
FAMILY FRIENDLY ACTION FUND$50,000
AMERICA VOTES$50,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY22–22, $75k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%GEORGIA INVESTOR ACTION FUND INC: $75k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

VT
NH
MT
MN
MA
PA
CA
VA
DC
AL
GA
TX

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

50%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$12M · 4 repeat orgs$12M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +24% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.

4 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2022, 0 since wound down; 27 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call). Read against FY2022, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
27

Total granted

$12M
$12M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+24%
+16%

Still filing today

75%
81%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 12% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7.4M went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24
EnvironmentCivil RightsPublic BenefitAnimalsHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementOther

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

  • THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION
    2× · 2022–2023 · $6.5M · revenue +24%
  • REWILD
    2× · 2022–2024 · $3.7M · revenue +18%
  • NORTHEAST WILDERNESS TRUST CORPORATION
    2× · 2022–2023 · $1.5M · revenue +59%

Funded once

  • SO
    SAVE OUR HOME PLANET ACTION INC
    one grant, 2024 · $6.7M · 87% of their budget
  • WC
    WATTTIME CORPORATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $3.0M · revenue +36%
  • CF
    Campaign for a Safe and Healthy CA See Schedule O For Complete Name
    one grant, 2024 · $500k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators

The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.

Education
2
Climate Equity Action Fund

The climate equity action fund (ceaf) works hand-in-hand with community-based partners in critical states across the country to secure and sustain policy wins for climate and clean energy. building on over a decade of trust with leading…

Environment
3
Climate Innovation Action Inc

To educate policymakers about climate policies generally and to directly advocate for specific legislation on climate change.

Environment
4
Evergreen Action

Advocate for and reform to climate policies at the national and state level.

Human Services
5
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
6
Environmental Defense Action Fund

To advocate for legislation and policies that protect the environment.

Environment
7
California Environmental Voters

To increase public awareness of elected officials' performances on environmental issues, to influence decisions of public officials on environmental legislation and policy, and to engage in related social welfare activities to promote and…

Civil Rights
8
Nrdc Action Fund Inc

To build political support for advancing the goals of the natural resources defense council.

—
9
Bank Climate Advocates

Bank Climate Advocates (BCA) combats climate change and its adverse effects primarily by using legal advocacy and action to align public financial institutions' investment policies and practices with the 1.5 degrees C warming limitation…

Environment
10
Clean Future Action Fund Inc

To educate, lobby and advocate for policies that advance clean energy development and deployment.

Environment
11
American Conservation Coalition Inc

The american conservation coalition inc. is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization dedicated to building the conservative environmental movement.

Environment
12
Rainforest Action Network

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.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Tides Advocacy and the most unlike its peers is Galeo Impact Fund Inc. 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 22 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number24%15%<5yr15%10%5–10yr20%20%10–20yr17%30%20–35yr11%15%35–55yr13%10%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value24%1%<5yr15%0%5–10yr20%5%10–20yr17%3%20–35yr11%78%35–55yr13%13%55yr+

The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 15% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/33
the rest of the field
14%
26,003/186,945

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.

04the grantee network

27 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. 27 of the 33 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
27/27
Grantees still filing
18/27
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

MARIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $45,338,715 · PhilanthropyMARIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION+1 more — $400,000 · PhilanthropyTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $8,763,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYSAVE OUR HOME PLANET ACTION INC — $6,651,000 · OtherSAVE OUR HOME PLANET ACT…+17 more — $1,553,500 · Other+17 moreTHE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION — $6,475,000 · EnvironmentTHE CONSERVA…NORTHEAST WILDERNESS TRUST CORPORATION — $1,463,994 · EnvironmentNORTHEAST WI…ALASKA WILDERNESS LEAGUE ACTION — $300,000 · Environment+2 more — $195,000 · EnvironmentREWILD — $3,730,000 · AnimalsWATTTIME CORPORATION — $3,000,000 · Science & TechFORWARD ACTION FUND — $50,000 · Civil RightsTHE VOTER PROJECT FUND — $50,000 · Civil RightsGLAHR ACTION NETWORK — $25,000 · Civil RightsTAKEACTION MINNESOTA — $50,000 · Public BenefitCENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS ACTION FUND — $50,000 · Public Benefit
Philanthropy$45,738,715Other$16,967,500Environment$8,433,994Animals$3,730,000Science & Tech$3,000,000Civil Rights$125,000Public Benefit$100,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetMARIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $45,338,715 over 2y, 11% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $8,763,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetSAVE OUR HOME PLANET ACTION INC — $6,651,000 over 1y, 87% of budgetTHE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION — $6,475,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetREWILD — $3,730,000 over 2y, 4.5% of budgetWATTTIME CORPORATION — $3,000,000 over 1y, 25% of budgetNORTHEAST WILDERNESS TRUST CORPORATION — $1,463,994 over 2y, 5.7% of budgetCampaign for a Safe and Healthy CA See Schedule O For Complete Name — $500,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetALASKA WILDERNESS LEAGUE ACTION — $300,000 over 1y, 68% of budgetMobile Baykeeper Inc — $150,000 over 1y, 7.8% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY — $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGeorgia Investor Action Fund Inc — $75,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCLIMATE CABINET ACTION — $75,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetBlack Voters Matter Fund Inc — $50,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetAmerica Votes — $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNEXTGEN CLIMATE ACTION — $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTAKEACTION MINNESOTA — $50,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS ACTION FUND — $50,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetFORWARD ACTION FUND — $50,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL VOTER PROJECT INC — $50,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetTHE VOTER PROJECT FUND — $50,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetSAVE THE YELLOWSTONE GRIZZLY — $45,000 over 1y, 29% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE CENTER — $40,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetGLAHR ACTION NETWORK — $25,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetGALEO IMPACT FUND INC — $25,000 over 1y, 8.7% of budgetThe Martin Luther King Jr Center For Nonviolent Social Change Inc — $12,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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.

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.

Sixteen Thirty FundTides AdvocacyTides FoundationThe Heising-Simons Ac…Women Donors Network …America VotesGreen Advocacy ProjectNEO Philanthropy Acti…Way to Win Action Fun…Open Society Action F…All Hands on Deck Net…Marin Community Found…
Sixteen Thirty FundDC23.1× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · Tides Advocacy · Tides Foundation · The Heising-Simons Action Fund · Women Donors Network Action · America Votes · Green Advocacy Project · NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · Open Society Action Fund Inc · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Marin 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 Holdfast Trust 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Northeast Wilderness Trust Corporation — 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 33 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines