Skip to content
Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· 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.

$610k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Environment$1.9MScience & Tech$1.8MCivil Rights$273kEmployment$130kCrime & Legal$54k
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $399,735, the rows itemized in this filing. The $609,735 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $210,000 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$200,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$16M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND$200,000
THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA$199,735
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 (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 83% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE: $500k → 16%COMUNIDADES ORGANIZANDO EL PODER Y LA ACCION LATINA: $16k → 11%FRESH ENERGY: $48k → 14%THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: $1.4M → 10%S2C PACIFIC: $70k → 10%HAWAII ALLIANCE FOR PROGRESSIVE ACTION: $83k → 9%COLUMBIA BUSINESS SCHOOL: $50k → 17%INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR CHINA'S ENVIRONMENT: $30k → 14%CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE ENVIRONMENT: $210k → 11%MELROSE TECHNOLOGIES LLC: $28k → 6%NC WARN: $40k → 11%OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $10k → 15%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENDER LAW CENTER: $24k → 9%GLENCOE STRATEGIES LLC: $81k → 14%BLEDSOE & ASSOCIATES LLC: $93k → 7%CLIMATE COMMUNICATIONS & LAW: $180k → 6%CHESAPEAKE ACTION NETWORK: $50k → 8%UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND: $200k → 11%CONSERVATION MINNESOTA: $16k → 11%AMERICAN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW: $75k → 14%SHINDELL CONSULTING LLC: $210k → 11%BLEDSOE & ASSOCIATES: $86k → 7%CLIMATE COMMUNICATIONS AND LAW: $165k → 6%MN350: $4k → 11%AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR JUSTICE: $30k → 14%CLIMATE GENERATION: $4k → 11%SMART SURFACES COALITION: $45k → 14%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

WA
MN
IL
WI
NY
MA
OH
NJ
CA
VA
MD
NC
DC
HI
FL

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.

South America$160k · 76% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CONSOLIDATING MODEL FOR JUST ENERGY TRANSITION, ENSURING CONTINUED COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND PARTICIPATION

South Asia$50k · 24% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: ACCELERATING INTEGRATED ACTION ON CLIMATE AND AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT ACTION IN INDIAN STATES

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. 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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 11% of Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Institute for Governance and Sustainable Developmentlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 9.5% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

54%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.2M · 3 repeat orgs$1.9M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +3194% since the first grant, against -1% for those 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
21

Total granted

$2.2M
$1.7M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+3194%
-1%

Still filing today

33%
76%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 50% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $200k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentCivil RightsEducationCrime & LegalCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • RO
    REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
    3× · 2023–2025 · $1.7M
  • CF
    CENTER FOR CLIMATE INTEGRITY
    2× · 2019–2020 · $345k · revenue ×33 · 66% of their budget
  • BA
    BLEDSOE & ASSOCIATES LLC
    2× · 2021–2024 · $179k

Funded once

  • CA
    CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC
    one grant, 2022 · $500k · revenue -2%
  • CF
    CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND ENVIRONMENT INCORPORATED
    one grant, 2023 · $210k · revenue -12%
  • SC
    SHINDELL CONSULTING LLC
    one grant, 2024 · $210k
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
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
2
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
3
Climate Catalyst Inc

Climate catalyst sparks collective action to tackle the biggest climate challenges we face today: cutting emissions in heavy industries.

Environment
4
International Council On Environmental Economics and Development Union
Human Services
5
The Climate Group Inc

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.…

Environment
6
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
7
Center for Climate and Energy Solutions Inc

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,…

Environment
8
Third Way

To research and develop centrist policy ideas.

Civil Rights
9
Conservation Law Foundation Inc

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,…

Environment
10
Clean Grid Alliance (Fna Wind On the Wires)

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…

Environment
11
Environment Now
—
12
Natural Resources Defense Council Inc

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…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Climate Generation; 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.
05the grantee network

19 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. 19 of the 26 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/19
Grantees still filing
10/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: $1,724,735 · OtherREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIASHINDELL CONSULTING LLC: $210,000 · OtherSHINDELL CONSULTING LLCUNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK: $200,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARKBLEDSOE & ASSOCIATES LLC: $179,400 · OtherBLEDSOE & ASSOCIATES LLCWORK ENVIRONMENT COUNCIL OF NEW JERSEY INC: $130,000 · Other+5 more: $238,600 · Other+5 moreCLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $500,000 · EnvironmentCLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INCCENTER FOR CLIMATE INTEGRITY: $344,854 · EnvironmentCENTER FOR CLIMATE INTEGRITYCHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK INC: $50,000 · EnvironmentFRESH ENERGY: $48,000 · EnvironmentSMART SURFACES COALITION: $45,000 · EnvironmentNC WARN INC: $40,000 · Environment+3 more: $30,000 · EnvironmentCENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND ENVIRONMENT INCORPORATED: $210,000 · Civil RightsCOPAL-EDUCATION FUND COMMUNIDADES ORGANIZANDO EL PODER Y LA A: $16,250 · Civil RightsAMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $75,000 · EducationTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $50,000 · Education+1 more: $3,750 · EducationHAWAII ALLIANCE FOR PROGRESSIVE ACTION: $82,500 · Community ImprovementEnvironmental Defender Law Center: $24,000 · Crime & Legal
Other$2,682,735Environment$1,057,854Civil Rights$226,250Education$128,750Community Improvement$82,500Crime & Legal$24,000

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 budgetCLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $500,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetCENTER FOR CLIMATE INTEGRITY: $344,854 over 2y, 66% of budgetWORK ENVIRONMENT COUNCIL OF NEW JERSEY INC: $130,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetHAWAII ALLIANCE FOR PROGRESSIVE ACTION: $82,500 over 1y, 19% of budgetAMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $75,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK INC: $50,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRESH ENERGY: $48,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetSMART SURFACES COALITION: $45,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetNC WARN INC: $40,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR CHINAS ENVIRONMENT: $30,000 over 1y, 27% of budgetAMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR JUSTICE: $30,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEnvironmental Defender Law Center: $24,000 over 1y, 4.6% of budgetCONSERVATION MINNESOTA: $16,250 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetCOPAL-EDUCATION FUND COMMUNIDADES ORGANIZANDO EL PODER Y LA A: $16,250 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetTHE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCLIMATE GENERATION: $3,750 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMN350: $3,750 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

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.

Tides FoundationThe Energy FoundationUnited States Energy …New Venture FundThe Minneapolis Found…The McKnight Foundati…PatagoniaorgSaint Paul & Minnesot…Center for Climate In…Global Greengrants Fu…Marbrook FoundationLongview Foundation
Tides FoundationCA19.6× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 13%
  • Work Environment Council of New Jersey Inc: 13% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
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 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.

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 26 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 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 Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development’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