· Public charity
Local Jobs & Economic Development Fund Inc
Local jobs & economic development fund supports local clean energy deployment across the u.s.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 72% of LOCAL JOBS & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND INC’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $16k
- $10k–50k10 grants · $264k
- $50k–250k15 grants · $1.6M
- $250k+8 grants · $6.6M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| AMERICAN JOBS AND ENERGY SECURITY | $1,654,000 |
| CONSERVATIVES FOR A CLEAN ENERGY FUTURE | $1,460,000 |
| WORKING FAMILIES PARTY PAC | $1,175,000 |
| LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC | $700,000 |
| NEBRASKA CONSERVATION VOTERS | $527,000 |
| FARM TO POWER INC | $500,000 |
| TCE VOTECLEANORG PAC | $377,500 |
| CLEAN UP THE RIVER ENVIRONMENT | $250,000 |
| KANSANS FOR AN AFFORDABLE FUTURE | $185,000 |
| MICHIGAN DEMOCRATIC STATE CENTRAL COMMITTEE | $175,000 |
| ACCELERATE ACTION INC | $165,000 |
| ALASKA PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP INC | $150,000 |
| LEAD LOCALLY | $125,000 |
| DEMOCRACYFIRST PAC | $100,000 |
| ONE TALLAHASSEE PAC | $100,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY24–24, $165k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
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.
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.
9 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 26 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 34% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5.6M went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- CFConservatives for a Clean Energy Future2× · 2023–2024 · $1.8M · revenue +139% · 29% of their budget
- NCNebraska Conservation Voters2× · 2023–2024 · $777k · revenue +10% · 55% of their budget
- TATIDES ADVOCACY2× · 2023–2024 · $360k · revenue +41%
Funded once
- EDENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE ACTION FUNDone grant, 2023 · $290k · revenue +24%
- CVCONSERVATIVE VALUES PACone grant, 2023 · $191k
- GCGEORGIA CONSERVATION VOTERS ED FUNDgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue +44%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.
Clean Tomorrow advances policies that reduce climate emissions by turning policy ambition into action. We work to catalyze rapid change that will accelerate the innovation and growth of clean energy.
Empowering Texans to fight pollution through sustained grassroots organizing campaigns that shift corporate and governmental policy.
The climate equity action fund (ceaf) works hand-in-hand with community-based partners in critical states across the country to secure and sustain policy wins for climate and clean energy. building on over a decade of trust with leading…
ConservAmerica is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to the development and advancement of market based energy, environmental, and conservation policy.
To champion secure, reliable, affordable, clean American energy.
Driving american jobs and competitiveness by leveraging our cleaner economy and enabling u.s. manufacturers to lead in advanced energy technologies.
United for Clean Power is focused on public policies that build a 21st century energy future.
Advocate for and reform to climate policies at the national and state level.
ENVIROVOTERS ED FUND is a nonpartisan organization dedicated to improving the quality of the environment for all Californians. ENVIROVOTERS ED FUND works to build the capacity of environmental organizations by developing and providing…
Clean Energy for Americas purpose is to engage with clean energy workers and advance the clean energy movement. CE4A highlights the feasibility and positive impact of a clean energy economy, educates policymakers and the general public on…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is League of Conservation Voters Inc and the most unlike its peers is Citizens for Trusted Community Leadership. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
25 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. 25 of the 50 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds Conservatives for a Clean Energy Future ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN JOBS AND ENERGY SECURITY FUND ↗
- Who funds Nebraska Conservation Voters ↗
- Who funds LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC ↗
- Who funds FARM-TO-POWER INC ↗
- Who funds TIDES ADVOCACY ↗
- Who funds CLEAN UP THE RIVER ENVIRONMENT ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds KANSANS FOR AN AFFORDABLE FUTURE ↗
- Who funds Alaska Public Interest Research Group ↗
- Who funds ACCELERATE ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds Renew Missouri Advocates ↗
- Who funds Arizonans for a Clean Economy ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA CONSERVATION VOTERS ED FUND ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION VOTERS OF SC EDUC FUND ↗
- Who funds WESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS ↗
- Who funds TEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC CITIZEN FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NEVADA ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds GROUNDWORK CENTER FOR RESILIENT COMMUNITIES INC ↗
- Who funds SEMILLA ACTION ↗
- Who funds CO-OP LEADERSHIP ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds Citizens For Trusted Community Leadership ↗
- Who funds THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Tides Advocacy · Energy Action Fund · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Windward Fund · United States Energy Foundation · League of Conservation Voters Inc · American Jobs and Energy Security Fund · Green Advocacy Project · Our American Future Action · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · The Energy Foundation · All Hands on Deck Network Inc
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 Local Jobs & Economic Development Fund Inc 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Local Jobs & Economic Development Fund Inc?
Find your warmest path to Local Jobs & Economic Development Fund Inc 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.