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

· 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.

$1.4M
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
9
States reached
$272k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Community Improvement$2.5MEnvironment$2.0MHousing & Shelter$1.3MEducation$788kHuman Services$631kPublic Safety & Disaster$528kEmployment$453kArts & Culture$318kOther$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 11 grants below total $1,066,774, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,377,943 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $311,169 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.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $101k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $687k
  • $250k+1 grant · $272k
$70,289
Median grant
9
States reached
$3.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GROUNDWORK OHIO RIVER VALLEY$271,746
ATMA CONNECT$195,185
THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND$187,790
EMERALD CITIES COLLABORATIVE$122,409
RIVER NETWORK$111,697
URBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK$70,289
AMERICAN SOCIETY OF ADAPTATION PROFESSIONALS$46,158
GREENROOTS$20,000
LA MUJER OBRERA$20,000
COMMUNITY BUILDERS NETWORK OF METRO ST LOUIS$14,500
IMANI COMMUNITY CHURCH$7,000
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:

Its 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. Its 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
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

VT
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
SD
OH
PA
CA
CO
MO
VA
MD
AZ
NC
SC
DC
LA
AL
GA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $288k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

East Asia and the Pacific$288k · 100% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: TO PROMOTE THE DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE AND CHARITABLE UNDERTAKINGS AND TO ENSURE THE EFFECTIVE USE OF THE DONATION FUNDS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CIVIL CODE OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA, THE LAW OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA ON ADMINISTRATION OF ACTIVITIES OF OVERSEAS NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS IN THE MAINLAND OF CHINA, THE CHARITY LAW OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA, REGULATIONS FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF FOUNDATIONS, AND OTHER APPLICABLE LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND RELEVANT INSTITUTIONAL RULES OF THE PARTIES. AIMS TO SUPPORT CHINA'S GOAL OF ACHIEVING CARBON NEUTRALITY BY 2060.

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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$8.7M · 34 repeat orgs$1.5M to everyone else

34 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 23 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

34
16

Total granted

$8.7M
$1.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
+66%

Still filing today

88%
69%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesEducationArts & CultureEmploymentOther
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

  • HG
    HEALTHY GULF
    6× · 2019–2024 · $710k · revenue +196%
  • WALNUT WAY CONSERVATION CORPORATION
    7× · 2018–2024 · $555k · revenue +119%
  • GO
    GROUNDWORK OHIO RIVER VALLEY INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $476k · revenue +27%

Funded once

  • GROUNDED SOLUTIONS NETWORKgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $470k · revenue +131%
  • EL
    ELEVATE LLC
    one grant, 2023 · $276k
  • TV
    THUNDER VALLEY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COR
    one grant, 2023 · $143k · revenue -30%
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
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
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
6
CarbonPlan

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

Environment
7
Eden Peopleplanet

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

International
8
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
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
Dc Greens Inc

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

Community Improvement
11
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
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Groundwork Ohio River Valley Inc; 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.
04the grantee network

44 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

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

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HEALTHY GULF: $710,423 · EnvironmentHEALTHY GULFAsian Pacific Environmental Network: $343,000 · EnvironmentAsian Pacific Environm…THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND: $250,032 · EnvironmentTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC L…RIVER NETWORK: $158,204 · EnvironmentRIVER NETWORKURBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK: $146,563 · EnvironmentURBAN SUSTAINABILITY D…GREENROOTS INC: $145,000 · EnvironmentGREENROOTS INCPACOIMA BEAUTIFUL: $142,500 · EnvironmentPACOIMA BEAUTIFULREGULATORY ASSISTANCE PROJECT: $92,278 · EnvironmentAMERICAN SOCIETY OF ADAPTATION PROFESSIONALS: $72,004 · Environment+2 more: $50,000 · EnvironmentGROUNDWORK OHIO RIVER VALLEY INC: $476,329 · Community ImprovementGROUNDWORK OHIO RIVE…WE STAY-NOS QUEDAMOS INC: $326,500 · Community ImprovementWE STAY-NOS QUEDAMOS…Garfield Park Community Council: $301,098 · Community ImprovementGarfield Park Commun…WARRENCONNER DEVELOPMENT COALITION: $182,294 · Community ImprovementWARRENCONNER DEVELOP…JASTECH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INC: $172,000 · Community ImprovementJASTECH DEVELOPMENT …EMANCIPATION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $169,000 · Community ImprovementEMANCIPATION ECONOMI…THUNDER VALLEY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COR: $142,500 · Community ImprovementTHUNDER VALLEY COMMU…SUSTAINING WAY: $75,000 · Community Improvement+2 more: $55,933 · 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 · OtherGROUNDED SOLUTIONS NETWORK: $470,282 · OtherGROUNDED SOLUTIONS NETWORKCALIFORNIA INDIAN MUSEUM & CULTURAL CENTER: $318,000 · OtherCALIFORNIA INDIAN MUSEUM & CULTURAL…Emerald Cities Collaborative Inc: $267,070 · OtherEmerald Cities Collaborative IncCENTRO DEL OBRERO FRONTERIZO INC: $263,000 · OtherCENTRO DEL OBRERO FRONTERIZO INCPARTNERSHIP FOR SOUTHERN EQUITY: $142,500 · OtherHouston Advanced Research Center: $119,971 · Other+9 more: $484,605 · Other+9 morePOWER52 INC: $453,283 · Human ServicesPOWER52 INCHEALTHY COMMUNITY RESOURCES AND ADVOCACY INC: $428,298 · Human ServicesHEALTHY COMM…UNLIMITED POTENTIAL INC: $158,500 · Human ServicesUNLIMITED PO…TIDES CENTER: $119,900 · Human ServicesTIDES CENTERTALENT YIELD COALITION INC: $44,000 · Human ServicesTEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIO: $358,076 · EducationLIVING CLASSROOMS FOUNDATION: $275,001 · EducationSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $142,500 · Education+1 more: $12,500 · EducationAtma Connect: $679,626 · InternationalWALNUT WAY CONSERVATION CORPORATION: $555,139 · Housing & Shelter
Environment$2,110,004Community Improvement$1,900,654Other$3,265,576Human Services$1,203,981Education$788,077International$679,626Housing & Shelter$555,139

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 budgetHEALTHY GULF: $710,423 over 6y, 14% of budgetAtma Connect: $679,626 over 2y, 53% of budgetWALNUT WAY CONSERVATION CORPORATION: $555,139 over 7y, 11% of budgetGROUNDWORK OHIO RIVER VALLEY INC: $476,329 over 3y, 14% 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 budgetEmerald Cities Collaborative Inc: $267,070 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetCENTRO DEL OBRERO FRONTERIZO INC: $263,000 over 7y, 8.3% of budgetTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND: $250,032 over 2y, 0.1% 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 budgetRIVER NETWORK: $158,204 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetURBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK: $146,563 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetGREENROOTS INC: $145,000 over 3y, 1.6% of budgetTHUNDER VALLEY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COR: $142,500 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetPACOIMA BEAUTIFUL: $142,500 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetPARTNERSHIP FOR SOUTHERN EQUITY: $142,500 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetNEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES OF SOUTH FLORIDA: $142,500 over 2y, 2.7% of budgetSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $142,500 over 1y, 0.2% 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 budgetSUSTAINING WAY: $75,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetAMERICAN SOCIETY OF ADAPTATION PROFESSIONALS: $72,004 over 2y, 9.6% of budgetWESTSIDE HOUSING ORGANIZATION INC: $55,038 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetWest Street Recovery: $44,000 over 1y, 6.2% of budgetCommunity Builders Network of Metro St Louis: $36,500 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetOPERATION BETTER BLOCK INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.6% 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
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.

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

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%4%15%34%60%funder's 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
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.

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 52 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 Sustainable Communities’ 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