Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

Institute for Sustainable Communities

The INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES (isc) is an international, 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that brings partners, expertise, and funding to communities that are most vulnerable to climate change and the effect it has on the lives of people in the u.s.

$2.1M
Granted FY2024still arriving
27
Grants FY2024still arriving
17
States reached
$484k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
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 FY2017–2024.

Community Improvement$2.5MEnvironment$2.0MHousing & Shelter$1.3MEducation$788kHuman Services$631kPublic Safety & Disaster$528kEmployment$453kArts & Culture$318kOther$0
02FY2024 · 27 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k8 grants · $200k
  • $50k–250k18 grants · $1.4M
  • $250k+1 grant · $484k
$50,000
Median grant
17
States reached
$4.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ATMA CONNECT$484,441
EMERALD CITIES COLLABORATIVE$144,661
GROUNDWORK OHIO RIVER VALLEY$129,583
TIDES CENTER$119,900
NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES OF SOUTH FLORIDA$117,500
PACOIMA BEAUTIFUL$117,500
ASIAN PACIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK$100,000
JASTECH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INC$97,000
URBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK$76,274
THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND$62,242
YOUTH MINISTRIES FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE$50,000
POWER 52$50,000
EMANCIPATION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL$50,000
EASTSIDE COMMUNITY NETWORK$50,000
LA MUJER OBRERA$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 (FY19–24, $1.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 39% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%UNLIMITED POTENTIAL: $143k → 11%TIDES CENTER: $120k → 10%POWER 52: $110k → 6%UNLIMITED POTENTIAL: $16k → 11%POWER 52: $108k → 6%POWER 52: $88k → 6%POWER 52: $75k → 6%POWER 52: $50k → 6%POWER 52: $23k → 6%TALENT YIELD COALITION INC: $44k → 16%HEALTHY COMMUNITY RESOURCES AND ADVOCACY: $110k → 23%HEALTHY COMMUNITY RESOURCES AND ADVOCACY: $95k → 23%HEALTHY COMMUNITY RESOURCES AND ADVOCACY: $75k → 23%HEALTHY COMMUNITY RESOURCES AND ADVOCACY: $75k → 23%HEALTHY COMMUNITY RESOURCES AND ADVOCACY: $50k → 23%HEALTHY COMMUNITY RESOURCES AND ADVOCACY: $23k → 23%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
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
SD
OH
PA
CA
CO
MO
VA
MD
AZ
NC
SC
DC
LA
AL
GA
TX
FL

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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$6.8M · 26 repeat orgs$2.4M to everyone else

26 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
16

Total granted

$6.8M
$1.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+63%
+98%

Still filing today

88%
69%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 54% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $909k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesEducationArts & CultureEmploymentOther

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

  • HG
    HEALTHY GULF
    6× · 2019–2024 · $710k · revenue +196%
  • WALNUT WAY CONSERVATION CORPORATION
    7× · 2018–2024 · $555k · revenue +119%
  • PI
    POWER52 INC
    6× · 2019–2024 · $453k · revenue +120%

Funded once

  • GROUNDED SOLUTIONS NETWORKgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $470k · revenue +131%
  • EL
    ELEVATE LLC
    one grant, 2023 · $276k
  • PF
    PARTNERSHIP FOR SOUTHERN EQUITY
    one grant, 2023 · $143k · revenue -32%

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
Earthcorps

To cultivate leaders and community partnerships to advance environmental justice.

International
2
Taproot Earth

Taproot Earth works with communities to support strategies around the use of water, energy and land.

Environment
3
Active San Gabriel Valley

Active San Gabriel Valley (ActiveSGV) is a community-based environmental advocacy and public health non-profit organization. Our mission is to promote a more sustainable, equitable, and livable San Gabriel Valley.

Community Improvement
4
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
5
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
6
Rogue Climate

Rogue Climate's mission is to empower Southern Oregon communities most impacted by climate change including low-income, rural, youth, seniors & communities of color, to win climate justice by organizing for clean energy, sustainable jobs &…

Education
7
Boulder Watershed Collective

The Boulder Watershed Collective is a 501c3 non-profit stakeholder-driven organization established to address forested watershed health,resiliency and stewardship. We have three program areas: ClimateAdaptation and Resilience Watershed…

Environment
8
Eden Peopleplanet

To offer the dignity of fair employment to people living in impoverished communities, who become transformational agents of global forest restoration.

International
9
Environment Next Inc

Environment next supports individuals, nonprofits and businesses around the world on solutions to complex climate issues. we provide leadership, outreach and communication support, grants, and investments to empower leaders and their ideas…

Environment
10
Wepower

We activate community power to redesign social systems to be just and equitable for all through (1) developing and supporting leaders and organizations and (2) leading campaigns, coalitions, and innovative initiatives.

Community Improvement
11
Dc Greens Inc

DC Greens advances health equity by building a just and resilient food system.

Community Improvement
12
Rainier Beach Cummunity Empowerment Coalition

Rainier Beach Action Coalition is a grassroot, Black-led organization devoted to locally driven development. It promotes quality education, living wage jobs, affordable transportation and housing, and building community capacity in…

Community Improvement

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Groundwork Ohio River Valley Inc and the most unlike its peers is People's Justice Council. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyEnvironmental Conservation …Affordable Housing Developm…Community FoundationsImmigrant Worker SupportUnited Way AffiliatesCommunity College Foundatio…
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 19 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%2%<5yr14%14%5–10yr19%36%10–20yr16%29%20–35yr13%19%35–55yr16%0%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%6%<5yr14%8%5–10yr19%34%10–20yr16%41%20–35yr13%12%35–55yr16%0%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 6% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/52
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,513

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

44 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. 44 of the 52 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
19
Early backer (in before they grew)
43/44
Grantees still filing
27/44
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

HEALTHY GULF — $710,423 · EnvironmentHEALTHY GULFAsian Pacific Environmental Network — $343,000 · EnvironmentAsian Pacific Enviro…PACOIMA BEAUTIFUL — $142,500 · EnvironmentPACOIMA BEAUTIFULGREENROOTS INC — $125,000 · EnvironmentGREENROOTS INCREGULATORY ASSISTANCE PROJECT — $92,278 · EnvironmentREGULATORY ASSISTANC…URBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK — $76,274 · EnvironmentTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND — $62,242 · Environment+4 more — $122,353 · Environment+4 moreWE STAY-NOS QUEDAMOS INC — $326,500 · Community ImprovementWE STAY-NOS QUEDAMO…Garfield Park Community Council — $301,098 · Community ImprovementGarfield Park Commu…GROUNDWORK OHIO RIVER VALLEY INC — $204,583 · Community ImprovementGROUNDWORK OHIO RIV…WARRENCONNER DEVELOPMENT COALITION — $182,294 · Community ImprovementWARRENCONNER DEVELO…JASTECH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INC — $172,000 · Community ImprovementJASTECH DEVELOPMENT…EMANCIPATION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL — $169,000 · Community ImprovementEMANCIPATION ECONOM…THUNDER VALLEY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COR — $142,500 · Community ImprovementTHUNDER VALLEY COMM…SUSTAINING WAY — $75,000 · Community Improvement+2 more — $41,433 · Community ImprovementEASTSIDE COMMUNTIY NETWORK — $425,706 · OtherEASTSIDE COMMUNTIY NETWORKELEVATE LLC — $276,442 · OtherELEVATE LLCUNITED PARENTS AGAINST LEAD — $230,500 · OtherUNITED PARENTS AGAINST LEADNEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES OF SOUTH FLORIDA — $142,500 · OtherYOUTH MINISTRIES FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE — $125,000 · OtherINTERSTATE RENEWABLE ENERGY COUNCIL — $104,052 · OtherGROUNDED SOLUTIONS NETWORK — $470,282 · OtherGROUNDED SOLUTIONS NETWORKCALIFORNIA INDIAN MUSEUM & CULTURAL CENTER — $318,000 · OtherCALIFORNIA INDIAN MUSEUM & CULTURAL C…CENTRO DEL OBRERO FRONTERIZO INC — $243,000 · OtherCENTRO DEL OBRERO FRONTERIZO INCEmerald Cities Collaborative Inc — $144,661 · OtherPARTNERSHIP FOR SOUTHERN EQUITY — $142,500 · OtherHouston Advanced Research Center — $119,971 · Other+8 more — $373,553 · Other+8 morePOWER52 INC — $453,283 · Human ServicesPOWER52 INCHEALTHY COMMUNITY RESOURCES AND ADVOCACY INC — $428,298 · Human ServicesHEALTHY COMMUN…UNLIMITED POTENTIAL INC — $158,500 · Human ServicesUNLIMITED POTE…TIDES CENTER — $119,900 · Human ServicesTIDES CENTERTALENT YIELD COALITION INC — $44,000 · Human ServicesTEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIO — $358,076 · EducationTEXAS SOU…LIVING CLASSROOMS FOUNDATION — $275,001 · EducationLIVING CL…SOCIAL GOOD FUND INC — $142,500 · EducationSOCIAL GO…+1 more — $12,500 · EducationWALNUT WAY CONSERVATION CORPORATION — $555,139 · Housing & ShelterAtma Connect — $484,441 · International
Environment$1,674,070Community Improvement$1,614,408Other$3,116,167Human Services$1,203,981Education$788,077Housing & Shelter$555,139International$484,441

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 budgetHEALTHY GULF — $710,423 over 6y, 14% of budgetWALNUT WAY CONSERVATION CORPORATION — $555,139 over 7y, 11% of budgetAtma Connect — $484,441 over 1y, 53% of budgetGROUNDED SOLUTIONS NETWORK — $470,282 over 1y, 12% of budgetPOWER52 INC — $453,283 over 6y, 24% of budgetHEALTHY COMMUNITY RESOURCES AND ADVOCACY INC — $428,298 over 6y, 54% of budgetTEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIO — $358,076 over 4y, 3.3% of budgetAsian Pacific Environmental Network — $343,000 over 6y, 1.4% of budgetWE STAY-NOS QUEDAMOS INC — $326,500 over 6y, 8.7% of budgetCALIFORNIA INDIAN MUSEUM & CULTURAL CENTER — $318,000 over 6y, 5.4% of budgetGarfield Park Community Council — $301,098 over 6y, 26% of budgetLIVING CLASSROOMS FOUNDATION — $275,001 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetCENTRO DEL OBRERO FRONTERIZO INC — $243,000 over 6y, 8.3% of budgetGROUNDWORK OHIO RIVER VALLEY INC — $204,583 over 2y, 5.2% of budgetWARRENCONNER DEVELOPMENT COALITION — $182,294 over 2y, 8.7% of budgetJASTECH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INC — $172,000 over 2y, 8.9% of budgetEMANCIPATION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL — $169,000 over 3y, 25% of budgetUNLIMITED POTENTIAL INC — $158,500 over 2y, 9.4% of budgetEmerald Cities Collaborative Inc — $144,661 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC — $142,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPARTNERSHIP FOR SOUTHERN EQUITY — $142,500 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetTHUNDER VALLEY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COR — $142,500 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetPACOIMA BEAUTIFUL — $142,500 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetNEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES OF SOUTH FLORIDA — $142,500 over 2y, 2.7% of budgetGREENROOTS INC — $125,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetHouston Advanced Research Center — $119,971 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetTIDES CENTER — $119,900 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetINTERSTATE RENEWABLE ENERGY COUNCIL — $104,052 over 2y, 2.2% of budgetREGULATORY ASSISTANCE PROJECT — $92,278 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetURBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK — $76,274 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSUSTAINING WAY — $75,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND — $62,242 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWESTSIDE HOUSING ORGANIZATION INC — $55,038 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetRIVER NETWORK — $46,507 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetWest Street Recovery — $44,000 over 1y, 6.2% of budgetOPERATION BETTER BLOCK INC — $25,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetCommunity Builders Network of Metro St Louis — $22,000 over 1y, 3.9% of budgetTHE URBAN COLLABORATIVE PROJECT DBA URBAN COLLABORATIVE PROJECT — $19,433 over 1y, 12% of budgetVIRGINIA NEW MAJORITY EDUCATION FUND — $12,500 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

United States Energy …Windward FundAmalgamated Charitabl…New Venture FundThe Kresge FoundationSolutions Project IncWater FoundationEnterprise Community …The Energy FoundationFreedom Together Foun…The Cynthia & George …Environmental Defense…
United States Energy FoundationCA37.9× affinity17 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United States Energy Foundation · Windward Fund · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · New Venture Fund · The Kresge Foundation · Solutions Project Inc · Water Foundation · Enterprise Community Partners Inc · The Energy Foundation · Freedom Together Foundation · The Cynthia & George Mitchell Foundation · Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated

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 Sustainable Communities 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 · 20%4%15%34%60%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • POWER52 Inc — 100% of income from government
  • Living Classrooms Foundation — 7% of income from government
  • Greenroots Inc — 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
14report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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 52 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 2024, released 2024. 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 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