Skip to content

· Private foundation

James and Aune Nelson Foundation

Its FY2022 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$1.1M
Granted FY2022
10
Grants FY2022
2
States reached
$595k
Largest
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2022.

Environment$5.5MAnimals$135kEducation$118kRecreation & Sports$42kCrime & Legal$41kHousing & Shelter$25kArts & Culture$24kScience & Tech$15kOther$0
02FY2022 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2022

  • Under $10k2 grants · $7k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $101k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $393k
  • $250k+1 grant · $595k
$25,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$19M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE NATRUE INSTITUTE$595,000
SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION$200,000
GREAT RIVERS LAND TRUST$193,000
GREAT RIVERS LAND TRUST$27,500
Individual grant recipient$25,000
TREEHOUSE WILDLIFE CENTER INC$20,000
RIVERLANDS AUDUBON CENTER$15,000
FRIENDS OF PERE MARQUETTE$13,000
LEWIS & CLARK COMMUNITY COLLEGE$5,000
SOUTHERN ILLINOIS PRESCRIBED BURN$2,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 99% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $200k → 10%RIVERLANDS AUDUBON CENTER: $15k → 5%TREEHOUSE WILDLIFE CENTER INC: $23k → 10%WATERSHED NATURE CENTER: $16k → 12%SOUTHERN ILLINOIS PRESCRIBED BURN: $30k → 16%SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $190k → 10%RIVERLANDS AUDUBON CENTER: $15k → 5%TREEHOUSE WILDLIFE CENTER INC: $23k → 10%WATERSHED NATURE CENTER: $10k → 12%SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $169k → 10%RIVERLANDS AUDUBON CENTER: $10k → 5%TREEHOUSE WILDLIFE CENTER INC: $20k → 10%TREEHOUSE WILDLIFE CENTER INC: $10k → 10%SIUE FOUNDATION: $10k → 12%TREEHOUSE WILDLIFE CENTER INC: $10k → 10%SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $205k → 12%GREAT RIVERS LAND TRUST: $204k → 12%SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $200k → 12%FRIENDS OF PERE MARQUETTE: $19k → 10%GREAT RIVERS LAND TRUST: $193k → 12%FRIENDS OF PERE MARQUETTE: $13k → 10%GREAT RIVERS LAND TRUST: $170k → 12%GREAT RIVERS LAND TRUST: $169k → 12%GREAT RIVERS LAND TRUST: $160k → 12%SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $155k → 12%GREAT RIVERS LAND TRUST: $150k → 12%GREAT RIVERS LAND TRUST: $28k → 12%GREAT RIVERS LAND TRUST: $28k → 12%GREAT RIVERS LAND TRUST: $22k → 12%GREAT RIVERS LAND TRUST: $14k → 12%GREAT RIVERS LAND TRUST: $13k → 12%MISSISSIPPI RIVER CONFLUENCE: $25k → 12%MISSISSIPPI RIVER CONFLUENCE: $15k → 12%THE NATRUE INSTITUTE: $595k → 12%THE NATRUE INSTITUTE: $513k → 12%THE NATRUE INSTITUTE: $479k → 12%THE NATRUE INSTITUTE: $465k → 12%THE NATRUE INSTITUTE: $460k → 12%THE NATRUE INSTITUTE: $441k → 12%THE NATURE INSTITUTE: $55k → 12%THE NATURE INSTITUTE: $44k → 12%LEWIS & CLARK COMMUNITY COLLEGE: $25k → 12%LEWIS & CLARK COMMUNITY COLLEGE: $25k → 12%LEWIS & CLARK COMMUNITY COLLEGE: $20k → 12%LEWIS & CLARK COMMUNITY COLLEGE: $20k → 12%LEWIS & CLARK COMMUNITY COLLEGE: $20k → 12%THE NATURE INSTITUTE: $15k → 12%THE NATURE INSTITUTE: $13k → 12%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.
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.9M · 12 repeat orgs$41k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2022, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
7

Total granted

$5.9M
$41k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+23%
+50%

Still filing today

25%
29%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22
EnvironmentAnimalsHousing & ShelterYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • TN
    THE NATURE INSTITUTE
    6× · 2017–2022 · $3.1M · revenue +23% · 77% of their budget
  • GR
    GREAT RIVERS LAND TRUST
    6× · 2017–2022 · $1.2M
  • SC
    SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION
    3× · 2017–2019 · $569k · revenue -55%

Funded once

  • SI
    SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY EDWARDSVILLE
    one grant, 2018 · $10k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $9k
  • RC
    RIVERBENDER COMMUNITY CENTER
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
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
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 20 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/7
Grantees still filing
5/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE NATURE INSTITUTE: $3,098,950 · OtherTHE NATURE INSTITUTEGREAT RIVERS LAND TRUST: $1,217,500 · OtherGREAT RIVERS LAND TRUSTSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $565,000 · OtherSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION+12 more: $402,405 · Other+12 moreSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $569,000 · EnvironmentSIERRA CLU…TREEHOUSE WILDLIFE CENTER INC: $92,000 · AnimalsGREATER ALTON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INC: $5,000 · Housing & ShelterEDWARDSVILLE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,500 · PhilanthropyBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF ALTON INC: $2,000 · Youth Development
Other$5,283,855Environment$569,000Animals$92,000Housing & Shelter$5,000Philanthropy$2,500Youth Development$2,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10k$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE NATURE INSTITUTE: $3,098,950 over 6y, 77% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $569,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTREEHOUSE WILDLIFE CENTER INC: $92,000 over 6y, 14% of budgetMCCULLY HERITAGE PROJECT INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetGREATER ALTON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INC: $5,000 over 1y, 97% of budgetEDWARDSVILLE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF ALTON INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.5% 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.

  • Who funds THE NATURE INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds TREEHOUSE WILDLIFE CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds MCCULLY HERITAGE PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds GREATER ALTON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds EDWARDSVILLE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF ALTON INC ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization James and Aune Nelson Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from James and Aune Nelson Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–5%
    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 James and Aune Nelson Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to James and Aune Nelson Foundation 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 20 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on James and Aune Nelson’s filings →

    More from the funding graph