Skip to content
Johanette Wallerstein Institute 5607-00-43 at a glance

· Private foundation

Johanette Wallerstein Institute 5607-00-43

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$750k
Granted FY2025still arriving
20
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$180k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Environment$2.6MEducation$60kHuman Services$60kCivil Rights$60kRecreation & Sports$40kOther$0
02FY2025 · 20 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $15k
  • $10k–50k12 grants · $275k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $460k
$25,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$12M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Natural Resources Defense Council Inc$180,000
Clientearth USA Inc$75,000
Cool Earth Action USA Inc$70,000
Rainforest Alliance Inc$70,000
The Nature Conservancy in New Jersey$65,000
Trust for Public Land$40,000
New Jersey Conservation Foundation$30,000
Greater Newark Conservancy$30,000
Riverkeeper Inc$30,000
Nature Conservancy$25,000
Conservation International Foundation$25,000
The Land Conservancy of New Jersey$20,000
New Jersey Highlands Coalition$20,000
Pinelands Preservation Alliance$15,000
Pacific Institute$15,000
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 (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 76% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%SEE ATTACHED STATEMENT: $715k → 22%Pacific Institute: $15k → 10%Clientearth USA Inc: $75k → 14%Riverkeeper Inc: $30k → 9%Natural Resources Defense Council Inc: $180k → 17%Highlands Coalition: $20k → 4%Pinelands Preservation Alliance: $15k → 7%New Jersey Tree Foundation: $15k → 11%Greater Newark Conservancy: $30k → 16%Nature Conservancy: $25k → 7%SEE ATTACHED STATEMENT: $625k → 22%Clientearth USA Inc: $65k → 14%Riverkeeper Inc: $30k → 9%Natural Resources Defense Council Inc: $160k → 17%Highlands Coalition: $20k → 4%Greater Newark Conservancy: $30k → 16%Conservation International Foundation: $25k → 7%CLIENTEARTH USA INC: $65k → 14%Riverkeeper Inc: $30k → 9%Natural Resources Defense Council Inc: $160k → 17%The Land Conservancy of New Jersey: $20k → 4%Greater Newark Conservancy: $30k → 16%Conservation International Foundation: $20k → 7%Clientearth USA Inc: $65k → 14%Riverkeeper Inc: $30k → 9%Natural Resources Defense Council Inc: $160k → 17%Cool Earth Action USA Inc: $70k → 4%Greater Newark Conservancy: $30k → 16%Rainforest Alliance Inc: $70k → 17%New Jersey Highlands Coalition: $20k → 4%New Jersey Conservation Foundation: $30k → 5%Rainforest Alliance Inc: $70k → 17%Cool Earth Action USA Inc: $70k → 4%New Jersey Conservation Foundation: $25k → 5%Rainforest Alliance Inc: $70k → 17%Highlands Coalition: $20k → 4%New Jersey Conservation Foundation: $25k → 5%New York University: $25k → 17%The Nature Conservancy in New Jersey: $65k → 4%New Jersey Conservation Foundation: $25k → 5%The Nature Conservancy in New Jersey: $60k → 4%Rainforest Alliance Inc: $70k → 17%The Nature Conservancy in New Jersey: $60k → 4%Trust for Public Land: $40k → 17%Trust for Public Land: $40k → 17%The Nature Conservancy in New Jersey: $60k → 4%Trust for Public Land: $40k → 17%Trust for Public Land: $40k → 17%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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.6M · 20 repeat orgs$160k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +25% since the first grant, against -3% for those funded once.

20 repeat relationships: 18 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

20
2

Total granted

$2.6M
$140k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+25%
-3%

Still filing today

75%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentEducationOther
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

  • NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $660k · revenue +34%
  • RA
    RAINFOREST ALLIANCE INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $280k · revenue +19%
  • CU
    CLIENTEARTH USA INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $270k · revenue +25%

Funded once

  • CE
    Cool Earth USA Inc
    one grant, 2022 · $70k
  • CE
    COOL EARTH ACTION USA INC
    one grant, 2023 · $70k · revenue -3%
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
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
2
Clean Ocean Action Inc

Clean ocean action's goal is to improve and protect the waters off the new jersey/new york coast from pollution, plastics, industrialization and climate change with research, education and citizen action.

Environment
3
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
4
Rainforest Alliance Holding Inc

RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.

Environment
5
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
6
The Quebec-Labrador Foundation Inc

The program mission of the quebec-labrador foundation u.s. is defined by a regional component (new england and eastern canada), and an international component, which ties our regional model to a global conservation network. qlf's program…

Philanthropy
7
Huron Pines Resource Conservation & Development Council Inc

It is our mission at huron pines to conserve and enhance northern michigan's natural resources to ensure healthy water, protected places and vibrant communities. for alomst 50 years, our work across the forests, lakes and streams of…

Environment
8
National Wildlife Federation

Unite all americans to ensure wildlife thrives in a rapidly changing world.

Animals
9
Wild Landscapes Inc

Wild landscapes, inc. (wli) is dedicated to conserving large and connected landscapes globally significant to wildlife and crucial to local communities. our environmental conservation strategy is to empower communities, conservationists,…

Animals
10
West Creek Conservancy

Our mission is to enrich the lives of all people in northeast ohio by conserving natural habitats, restoring the ecological value of our region's lands and waters, and expanding opportunities to connect people from all cultures to…

Environment
11
Wildlife Alliance Inc

Wildlife alliance is the leader in direct protection of forests and wildlife in tropical asia. our mission is to combat deforestation, biodiversity loss, climate change, and poverty by partnering with local communities and governments.…

Animals
12
Wildlife Conservation Society

The wildlife conservation society (wcs) saves wildlife and wild places worldwide through science, conservation action, education, and inspiring people to value nature.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Greater Newark Conservancy Inc; the most unlike its peers is Pacific Institute. 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

19 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. 19 of the 24 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/19
Grantees still filing
12/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $660,000 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INCCLIENTEARTH USA INC: $270,000 · EnvironmentCLIENTEARTH USA INCGREATER NEWARK CONSERVANCY INC: $120,000 · EnvironmentGREATER NEWARK CONSERVANCY INCRIVERKEEPER INC: $120,000 · EnvironmentRIVERKEEPER INCNEW JERSEY CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $105,000 · EnvironmentNEW JERSEY CONSERVATION FOUNDATIONCOOL EARTH ACTION USA INC: $70,000 · EnvironmentTHE LAND CONSERVANCY OF NEW JERSEY: $65,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $65,000 · EnvironmentPINELANDS PRESERVATION ALLIANCE: $60,000 · EnvironmentNEW JERSEY TREE FOUNDATION: $60,000 · Environment+5 more: $115,000 · Environment+5 moreRAINFOREST ALLIANCE INC: $280,000 · OtherRAINFOREST ALLIANCE INCThe Nature Conservancy in New Jersey: $245,000 · OtherThe Nature Conservancy in New JerseyTrust for Public Land: $160,000 · OtherTrust for Public LandCool Earth Action USA Inc: $140,000 · OtherCool Earth Action USA IncCool Earth USA Inc: $70,000 · OtherCool Earth USA IncHighlands Coalition: $60,000 · OtherHighlands CoalitionPACIFIC INSTITUTE: $60,000 · OtherPACIFIC INSTITUTE+1 more: $25,000 · OtherNew York University: $60,000 · Education
Environment$1,710,000Other$1,040,000Education$60,000

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 budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $660,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetRAINFOREST ALLIANCE INC: $280,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCLIENTEARTH USA INC: $270,000 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetGREATER NEWARK CONSERVANCY INC: $120,000 over 4y, 2.0% of budgetRIVERKEEPER INC: $120,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetNEW JERSEY CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $105,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetCOOL EARTH ACTION USA INC: $70,000 over 1y, 6.2% of budgetTHE LAND CONSERVANCY OF NEW JERSEY: $65,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $65,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetPINELANDS PRESERVATION ALLIANCE: $60,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetNew York University: $60,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetNEW JERSEY TREE FOUNDATION: $60,000 over 4y, 1.8% of budgetCATSKILL MOUNTAINKEEPER INC: $40,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHACKENSACK RIVERKEEPER INC: $20,000 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetNEW JERSEY HIGHLANDS COALITION: $20,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetRARITAN HEADWATERS ASSOCIATION: $20,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetRARITAN BAYKEEPER INC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.8% 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.

Geraldine R Dodge Fou…Victoria Foundation I…Pseg Foundation IncCommunity Foundation …New Jersey League of …Ej Grassmann TrustThe Hyde and Watson F…Bristol-Myers Squibb …PatagoniaorgNew Jersey Conservati…The Leavens Foundatio…Fund for New Jersey
Geraldine R Dodge Foundation IncNJ21.9× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Geraldine R Dodge Foundation Inc · Victoria Foundation Inc · Pseg Foundation Inc · Community Foundation of New Jersey · New Jersey League of Conservation Voters Education Fund · Ej Grassmann Trust · The Hyde and Watson Foundation · Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation Inc · Patagoniaorg · New Jersey Conservation Foundation · The Leavens Foundation Inc · Fund for New Jersey

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 Johanette Wallerstein Institute 5607-00-43 funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Johanette Wallerstein Institute 5607-00-43. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 94%
  • New Jersey Tree Foundation: 100% of income from government
  • Raritan Headwaters Association: 94% of income from government
  • Pinelands Preservation Alliance: 35% of income from government
  • Hackensack Riverkeeper Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely 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 24 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Johanette Wallerstein Institute 5607-00-43’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