· Public charity
Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development
Igsd's mission is to promote fast climate mitigation to slow near-term warming and self-propagating climate feedbacks, avoid or at least delay catastrophic climate and societal tipping points, and limit global temperatures to 1.5 cor at least keep this temperature guardrail in sight and limit overshoot.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 64% of INSTITUTE FOR GOVERNANCE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 2 grants below total $399,735 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $609,735 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $210,000 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND | $200,000 |
| THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA | $199,735 |
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 (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 83% 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
Grants abroad, by region — $210k on the FY2025 return
Schedule F, as filed: 2 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: CONSOLIDATING MODEL FOR JUST ENERGY TRANSITION, ENSURING CONTINUED COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND PARTICIPATION
Stated purpose: ACCELERATING INTEGRATED ACTION ON CLIMATE AND AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT ACTION IN INDIAN STATES
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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 11% of Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +3194% since the first grant, against -1% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 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, 50% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $200k 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
- ROREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA3× · 2023–2025 · $1.7M
- CFCENTER FOR CLIMATE INTEGRITY2× · 2019–2020 · $345k · revenue ×33 · 66% of their budget
- BABLEDSOE & ASSOCIATES LLC2× · 2021–2024 · $179k
Funded once
- CACLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INCone grant, 2022 · $500k · revenue -2%
- SCSHINDELL CONSULTING LLCone grant, 2024 · $210k
- CFCENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND ENVIRONMENT INCORPORATEDone grant, 2023 · $210k · revenue -12%
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.
The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.
Climate catalyst sparks collective action to tackle the biggest climate challenges we face today: cutting emissions in heavy industries.
Climate group advances climate action by mobilizing business and government leadership to drive systemic decarbonization across energy, transport, and industry, while engaging the public through large-scale convenings and global platforms.…
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
The nonpartisan center for climate and energy solutions works to secure a safe and stable climate by accelerating the global transition to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions and a thriving, just, and resilient economy. for over 25 years,…
To research and develop centrist policy ideas.
Conservation law foundation, inc. (clf) protects new england's environment for the benefit of all people and future generations. we use the law, science, and markets to create solutions that preserve and restore our natural resources,…
Our mission is to advance renewable energy in the midwest by applying technical expertise and building support to expand markets. we focus on educating key decision makers through technical, communications and media work, and public…
We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Climate Generation and the most unlike its peers is American University. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
19 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. 19 of the 26 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 CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR CLIMATE INTEGRITY ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND ENVIRONMENT INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds WORK ENVIRONMENT COUNCIL OF NEW JERSEY INC ↗
- Who funds HAWAII ALLIANCE FOR PROGRESSIVE ACTION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds CHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds FRESH ENERGY ↗
- Who funds SMART SURFACES COALITION ↗
- Who funds NC WARN INC ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR CHINAS ENVIRONMENT ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Environmental Defender Law Center ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION MINNESOTA ↗
- Who funds COPAL-EDUCATION FUND COMMUNIDADES ORGANIZANDO EL PODER Y LA A ↗
- Who funds THE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE GENERATION ↗
- Who funds MN350 ↗
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: Tides Foundation · The Energy Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · New Venture Fund · The Minneapolis Foundation · The McKnight Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation · Center for Climate Integrity · Global Greengrants Fund · Marbrook Foundation · Longview 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 Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development 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.
- Work Environment Council of New Jersey Inc — 13% 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 Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development?
Find your warmest path to Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development 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.