Skip to content
McDanel Land Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

McDanel Land Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$102k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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.

Environment$605kAnimals$27kPublic Benefit$24kHuman Services$8kArts & Culture$5kPublic Safety & Disaster$5kHousing & Shelter$5kEducation$1k
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $19k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $83k
$15,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$947k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE LANDS COUNCIL$25,000
CONSERVATION NW$15,000
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY IDAHO$15,000
THE MOUNTAINEERS$15,000
IDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE$13,000
SELKIRK CONSERVATION ALLIANCE$8,000
VITAL GROUND FOUNDATION$8,000
SAVE OUR WILD SALMON$3,000
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 (FY17–17, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $1k → 9%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

WA
ID
MT
WI
NY
OR
CA
AZ
SC
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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$566k · 17 repeat orgs$114k to everyone else

17 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
13

Total granted

$566k
$74k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
+55%

Still filing today

71%
62%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 61% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $40k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentAnimalsHealthHuman ServicesOther
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

  • CN
    CONSERVATION NW
    6× · 2017–2024 · $164k · revenue +79%
  • IC
    IDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE INC
    7× · 2017–2024 · $85k · revenue +35%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF CANADIAN NATURE INC
    5× · 2018–2023 · $78k · revenue +36%

Funded once

  • FN
    FORTERRA NW
    one grant, 2017 · $15k · revenue -6%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $15k
  • AW
    ALASKA WILDERNESS LEAGUE
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
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
Cascadia Wildlands

Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…

Environment
2
Washington Forest Law Center

Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.

—
3
Western Rivers Conservancy

Western rivers conservancy's mission is to protect outstanding river ecosystems in the western united states. continued on schedule o.we acquire land to conserve critical habitat, provide public access for compatible use and enjoyment, and…

Environment
4
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
5
Wild Salmon Rivers

To conserve functioning salmon/steelhead eco-system at watershed levels, integrate angling activities with basic scientific research, collect raw data, monitor environmental functions, salmon/steelhead population dynamics, public…

Environment
6
Idaho Wildlife Federation

The Idaho Wildlife Federation (IWF) promotes the conservation of Idaho's wildlife heritage and legacy of sporting opportunities for the current and future generations.

Animals
7
Idaho Forest Restoration Partnership
Environment
8
Inland Northwest Land Trust

To conserve, care for, and connect with the lands and waters essential to life in the inland northwest.

Environment
9
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
10
Yaak Valley Forest Council

Working for a wild yaak through science, education, and bold action.

Environment
11
Council of Western State Foresters

The council of western state foresters (cwsf) promotes the conservation, protection, and sustainable management of forests for today and generations to come by leading collective action, fostering learning, facilitating resource sharing,…

Environment
12
Washington Water Trust

Wwt's mission is to protect and restore water in rivers and streams across washington state. washington water trust restores and protects water in rivers and streams and promotes sustainable freshwater management in washington, and, more…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Forterra Nw; the most unlike its peers is The Peregrine Fund 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

22 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. 22 of the 32 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/22
Grantees still filing
18/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONSERVATION NW: $164,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION NWAMERICAN FRIENDS OF CANADIAN NATURE INC: $78,000 · EnvironmentAMERICAN FRIENDS OF CANADIAN NATURE INCTHE LANDS COUNCIL: $25,000 · EnvironmentTHE LANDS COUNCILTHE MOUNTAINEERS: $15,000 · EnvironmentFORTERRA NW: $15,000 · Environment+7 more: $34,000 · Environment+7 moreIndividual grant recipient: $92,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE INC: $85,000 · OtherIDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE INCFERRY COUNTY RAIL TRAIL PARTNERS: $24,000 · OtherFERRY COUNTY RAIL TRAIL PARTNERSSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $23,000 · OtherSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATIONTHE VITAL GROUND FOUNDATION INC: $19,500 · OtherTHE VITAL GROUND FOUNDATION INCSELKIRK CONSERVATION ALLIANCE: $16,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $15,000 · Other+8 more: $35,200 · Other+8 moreWASHINGTON WILD: $22,000 · AnimalsXERCES SOCIETY INC: $7,000 · AnimalsSAVE OUR WILD SALMON: $4,500 · AnimalsMEDIC ONE FOUNDATION: $4,000 · HealthAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $1,000 · Human Services
Environment$331,000Other$309,700Animals$33,500Health$4,000Human Services$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 budgetCONSERVATION NW: $164,000 over 6y, 3.8% of budgetIDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE INC: $85,000 over 7y, 0.8% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF CANADIAN NATURE INC: $78,000 over 5y, 3.5% of budgetTHE LANDS COUNCIL: $25,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetWASHINGTON WILD: $22,000 over 4y, 1.8% of budgetTHE VITAL GROUND FOUNDATION INC: $19,500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetSELKIRK CONSERVATION ALLIANCE: $16,000 over 2y, 8.4% of budgetTHE MOUNTAINEERS: $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetFORTERRA NW: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE DIGDEEP RIGHT TO WATER PROJECT: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetXERCES SOCIETY INC: $7,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNorth Cascades Institute: $7,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetALDO LEOPOLD FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetUPSTATE FOREVER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTETON REGIONAL LAND TRUST INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE PEREGRINE FUND INC: $4,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSAVE OUR WILD SALMON: $4,500 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetMEDIC ONE FOUNDATION: $4,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKEEP BREVARD BEAUTIFUL INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFlorida Wildlife Corridor Foundation Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

PatagoniaorgSeattle FoundationMightycause Charitabl…Gs Donor Advised Phil…The Hugh and Jane Fer…Vanguard Charitable E…American Endowment Fo…National Philanthropi…The Blackbaud Giving …Morgan Stanley Global…The Bank of America C…Raymond James Charita…
PatagoniaorgCA17× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Patagoniaorg · Seattle Foundation · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Hugh and Jane Ferguson Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund

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 McDanel Land Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from McDanel Land Foundation. 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 22%
  • Xerces Society Inc: 22% of income from government
  • Keep Brevard Beautiful Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
5report 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to McDanel Land Foundation?

Find your warmest path to McDanel Land 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 32 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on McDanel Land’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