Skip to content

· Private foundation

Louise Arnold Maddux Environmental Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$46k
Granted FY2025still arriving
46
Grants FY2025still arriving
15
States reached
$1k
Largest
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Environment$152kAnimals$38kFood & Nutrition$29kInternational$21kHousing & Shelter$12kScience & Tech$9kPublic Benefit$5kHealth$4kOther$0
02FY2025 · 46 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
15
States reached
$1.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SANTA FE WATERSHED ASSOC$1,000
WARD 8 WOODS CONSERVATION$1,000
THE FOOD DEPOT$1,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
REUNITY RESOURCES$1,000
THE FORESTRY AND FIRE RECRUITMENT P$1,000
CONEJOS COUNTY CLEAN WATER$1,000
NEW RIVER LAND TRUST$1,000
CHICAGO ECO HOUSE$1,000
SOLAR COOKERS INTL$1,000
SEA TURTLE CONSERVANCY$1,000
STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOC$1,000
HEART & SOUL ANIMAL SANCTUARY$1,000
DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS$1,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
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 (FY17–25, $11k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%THINK NEW MEXICO: $1k → 12%THINK NEW MEXICO: $1k → 12%The Food Depot: $1k → 12%The Food Depot: $1k → 12%The Food Depot: $1k → 12%The Food Depot: $1k → 12%The Food Depot: $1k → 12%THE FOOD DEPOT: $1k → 12%THE FOOD DEPOT: $1k → 12%The Food Depot: $1k → 12%The Food Depot: $1k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

NH
IL
NY
MA
PA
CA
CO
VA
MD
DE
NM
AR
NC
DC
HI
FL
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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$262k · 52 repeat orgs$25k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +53% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

52 repeat relationships: 31 still active in FY2025, 21 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

52
10

Total granted

$262k
$10k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+53%
0%

Still filing today

56%
30%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k 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
EnvironmentInternationalAnimalsFood & NutritionHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • THE FOOD DEPOT
    9× · 2017–2025 · $9k · revenue +84%
  • CC
    CONEJOS COUNTY CLEAN WATER INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $9k · revenue +53%
  • SC
    Solar Cookers International
    9× · 2017–2025 · $9k · revenue +82%

Funded once

  • EV
    ESPANOLA VALLY ANIMAL SHELTER
    one grant, 2024 · $1k
  • NF
    Ngeta Foundation co Estill Putney
    one grant, 2017 · $1k
  • UA
    Urban Association Of Forestry Fir
    one grant, 2022 · $1k
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
Sustainable Conservation

Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…

Environment
2
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
3
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
4
San Juan Citizens Alliance

The San Juan Citizens Alliance advocates for clean air, pure water, and healthy lands - the foundations of resilient communities, ecosystems and economies in the San Juan Basin.

Environment
5
Rainforest Alliance 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.

—
6
Santa Fe Forest Coalition

Educate the public on forest conservation issues in New Mexico

Environment
7
Natural Resources Defense Council Inc

We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…

Environment
8
Nature and Culture International

Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.

Environment
9
Rainforest Foundation Inc

The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.

Environment
10
Wild Earth Society Incorporated

Wildlands Network works to reconnect, restore and rewild North America so that life-in all its diversity-can thrive.

Arts & Culture
11
Socially Responsible Agriculture Project Inc

To conduct charitable, scientific and educational activities designed to foster the production of food in a manner that is economically viable and environmentally sound and provides for healthy and humanely raised products.

Food & Nutrition
12
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Santa Fe Watershed Association; the most unlike its peers is Conejos County Clean Water Inc. 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, 2017–2025.

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. 44 of the 78 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)
18
Early backer (in before they grew)
42/44
Grantees still filing
33/44
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC: $9,000 · OtherTHE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INCWARD 8 WOODS CONSERVATION: $7,000 · OtherWARD 8 WOODS CONSERVATIONFriends of the Rio Grande: $7,000 · OtherFriends of the Rio GrandeRocky Mountain Institute: $7,000 · OtherRocky Mountain InstituteRocky Mountain Field Institute Inc: $6,000 · OtherHOPEWORKS: $6,000 · OtherESPANOLA VALLEY ANIMAL SHELTER: $5,000 · OtherHabitat for Humanity - Santa Fe: $5,000 · OtherThe Blacksburg Friends Meeting: $5,000 · OtherSTREET HOMELESS ANIMAL PROJECT: $5,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · Other+30 more: $59,000 · Other+30 moreCONEJOS COUNTY CLEAN WATER INC: $9,000 · EnvironmentCONEJOS COUNTY CLEAN WATER IN…Solar Cookers International: $9,000 · EnvironmentSolar Cookers InternationalOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $9,000 · EnvironmentOCEAN CONSERVANCYSANTA FE WATERSHED ASSOCIATION: $9,000 · EnvironmentSANTA FE WATERSHED ASSOCIATIO…EARTH CARE INTERNATIONAL EARTH CARE NEW MEXICO: $7,000 · EnvironmentEARTH CARE INTERNATIONAL EART…AMERICAN RIVERS INC: $6,000 · EnvironmentAMERICAN RIVERS INCTREES FOR THE FUTURE INC: $6,000 · EnvironmentTREES FOR THE FUTURE INCTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $5,000 · EnvironmentTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATIONNEW RIVER LAND TRUST: $4,000 · Environment350ORG: $3,000 · Environment+8 more: $9,000 · Environment+8 moreTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $9,000 · InternationalTHE UNION OF CON…RURAL ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION INTERNATION: $9,000 · InternationalRURAL ADVANCEMEN…LOS ALAMOS STUDY GROUP: $9,000 · InternationalLOS ALAMOS STUDY…MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $9,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FR…Sea Turtle Conservancy: $4,000 · InternationalSea Turtle Conse…WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $3,000 · InternationalWORLD CENTRAL KI…NEW MEXICO LAND CONSERVANCY: $8,000 · Food & NutritionSTOREHOUSE NEW MEXICO: $5,000 · Food & NutritionROADRUNNER FOOD BANK INC: $2,000 · Food & NutritionURBAN GROWERS COLLECTIVE INC: $1,000 · Food & NutritionRIO GRANDE COMMUNITY FARMS: $1,000 · Food & NutritionTHE HEART AND SOUL ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $9,000 · AnimalsPROJECT STREET VET: $3,000 · AnimalsHOPE FOR PAWS: $2,000 · AnimalsLand of Enchantment Wildlife Foundation: $1,000 · AnimalsPAW WARRIORS INC: $1,000 · AnimalsTHE FOOD DEPOT: $9,000 · Human ServicesTHINK NEW MEXICO: $2,000 · Human ServicesNehemiah Group dba Chicago Eco House: $1,000 · Community Improvement
Other$126,000Environment$76,000International$43,000Food & Nutrition$17,000Animals$16,000Human Services$11,000Community Improvement$1,000

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 budgetTHE FOOD DEPOT: $9,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetCONEJOS COUNTY CLEAN WATER INC: $9,000 over 9y, 0.6% of budgetSolar Cookers International: $9,000 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetTHE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC: $9,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $9,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $9,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetRURAL ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION INTERNATION: $9,000 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetSANTA FE WATERSHED ASSOCIATION: $9,000 over 9y, 0.6% of budgetTHE HEART AND SOUL ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $9,000 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetLOS ALAMOS STUDY GROUP: $9,000 over 9y, 1.3% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $9,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetNEW MEXICO LAND CONSERVANCY: $8,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetEARTH CARE INTERNATIONAL EARTH CARE NEW MEXICO: $7,000 over 7y, 0.9% of budgetRocky Mountain Institute: $7,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetRocky Mountain Field Institute Inc: $6,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetHOPEWORKS: $6,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN RIVERS INC: $6,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetTREES FOR THE FUTURE INC: $6,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetSTOREHOUSE NEW MEXICO: $5,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetNEW RIVER LAND TRUST: $4,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetSea Turtle Conservancy: $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPROJECT STREET VET: $3,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budget350ORG: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHOPE FOR PAWS: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHINK NEW MEXICO: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetROADRUNNER FOOD BANK INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEarth Conservation Corps: $2,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetNehemiah Group dba Chicago Eco House: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetKITCHEN ANGELS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPAW WARRIORS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetNatural Capitalism Solutions Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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 FOOD DEPOT ↗
  • Who funds CONEJOS COUNTY CLEAN WATER INC ↗
  • Who funds Solar Cookers International ↗
  • Who funds THE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds OCEAN CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
  • Who funds RURAL ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION INTERNATION ↗
  • Who funds SANTA FE WATERSHED ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds THE HEART AND SOUL ANIMAL SANCTUARY ↗
  • Who funds LOS ALAMOS STUDY GROUP ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds NEW MEXICO LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds EARTH CARE INTERNATIONAL EARTH CARE NEW MEXICO ↗
  • Who funds Rocky Mountain Institute ↗
  • Who funds Rocky Mountain Field Institute Inc ↗
  • Who funds HOPEWORKS ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN RIVERS INC ↗
  • Who funds TREES FOR THE FUTURE INC ↗
  • Who funds STOREHOUSE NEW MEXICO ↗
  • Who funds THE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds NEW RIVER LAND TRUST ↗
  • Who funds Sea Turtle Conservancy ↗
  • Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT STREET VET ↗
  • Who funds 350ORG ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗

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.

Santa Fe Community FoundationNM25.3× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Santa Fe Community Foundation · Albuquerque Community Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Nusenda Foundation · Marshall L and Perrine D McCune Charitable Foundation Inc · Clif Family Foundation · Bolene Charitable Trust · Lannan Foundation · Carl C Anderson Sr and Marie Jo Anderson Charitable Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · S B Foundation · The Abeles Foundation

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 Louise Arnold Maddux Environmental Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Louise Arnold Maddux Environmental Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Sea Turtle Conservancy: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
12report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely 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 78 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 Louise Arnold Maddux Environmental’s filings →

More from the funding graph