Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

National Audubon Society Inc

We work towards a future where birds thrive across the americas because audubon is a powerful, diverse, and ever-growing force for conservation.

$12M
Granted FY2025still arriving
222
Grants FY2025still arriving
41
States reached
$999k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

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

Environment$18MAnimals$11MRecreation & Sports$2.2MEducation$1.9MPublic Benefit$860kArts & Culture$703kFood & Nutrition$647kCommunity Improvement$568kOther$0
02FY2025 · 222 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 222 grants below total $7,493,464 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $12,167,696 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $4,674,232 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k61 grants · $427k
  • $10k–50k137 grants · $2.6M
  • $50k–250k18 grants · $1.8M
  • $250k+6 grants · $2.6M
$14,133
Median grant
41
States reached
$641M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DUCKS UNLIMITED INC$999,421
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION$420,000
MONTANA AUDUBON SOCIETY$344,175
ALABAMA AUDUBON$292,567
AUDUBON OF KANSAS$286,955
SAN DIEGO AUDUBON SOCIETY$269,835
BUENA VISTA AUDUBON SOCIETY$236,306
US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE$218,378
WIDGEON LAND COMPANY$199,590
TREASURER VA TECH$127,720
TULARE COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT$123,750
SADDLEBACK RANCH$102,500
PROSPECT PARK ALLIANCE$95,860
BUTTE LODGE OUTING CLUB INC$95,681
CITY OF ORANGE BEACH$94,419
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $307k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 70% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%COBBS CREEK COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CTR: $15k → 10%Plumas Audubon Society: $6k → 13%COBBS CREEK COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CTR: $14k → 10%Plumas Audubon Society: $29k → 13%Cobbs Creek Community Environmental Educ: $12k → 10%Plumas Audubon Society: $25k → 13%Cobbs Creek Community Environmental Education Ctr: $12k → 10%Plumas Audubon Society: $25k → 13%PLUMAS AUDUBON SOCIETY: $8k → 13%PLUMAS AUDUBON SOCIETY: $8k → 13%Cobbs Creek Com Environmental Edu Ctr: $21k → 22%COBBS CREEK COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CTR: $15k → 22%COBBS CREEK COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CTR: $14k → 22%COBBS CREEK COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CTR: $14k → 22%Cobbs Creek Community Environmental Edu Ctr: $12k → 22%SKAGWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERV: $40k → 9%HEALTHY COMMUNITY SERVICES: $38k → 23%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

AK
ME
VT
NH
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
MD
DE
AZ
NM
KS
TN
NC
SC
DC
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region — $1.3M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 4 regions, $1.3M to organizations and $11k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

South America$783k · 58% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT

North America (Canada and Mexico)$281k · 21% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT

Central America and the Caribbean$205k · 15% · 4 grants · 1 person

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$81k · 6% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

62%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$23M · 202 repeat orgs$14M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +55% since the first grant, against +7% for the ones you funded once.

202 repeat relationships — 123 still active in FY2025, 79 since wound down; 93 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

202
173

Total granted

$23M
$12M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+55%
+7%

Still filing today

66%
55%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.2M 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
EnvironmentAnimalsEducationArts & CultureRecreation & SportsCommunity ImprovementOther

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

  • DU
    Ducks Unlimited Inc
    5× · 2018–2025 · $1.7M · revenue +97%
  • AA
    ALABAMA AUDUBON
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +166% · 39% of their budget
  • SD
    San Diego Bird Alliance
    9× · 2017–2025 · $938k · revenue +84%

Funded once

  • EP
    EAST PARK LEADERSHIP AND CONSERVATION CENTER
    one grant, 2017 · $4.3M · revenue -84%
  • HH
    HUNT HILL NATURE CENTER INC
    one grant, 2017 · $1.3M · revenue -39%
  • NA
    NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY ACTION FUND
    one grant, 2019 · $798k · revenue -12% · 50% of their budget

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
New Jersey Audubon Society

The new jersey audubon society is a privately supported, not-for-profit, statewide membership organization. (see schedule o for details).

Environment
2
Maine Audubon Society

Maine Audubon works to conserve Maine's wildlife and habitat by engaging people of all ages in education, conservation, and action. We are helping the people of Maine become the nation's most informed and effective stewards of wildlife and…

Environment
3
National Audubon Society Inc

We work towards a future where birds thrive across the americas because audubon is a powerful, diverse, and ever-growing force for conservation. (continued on schedule o).

Environment
4
Massachusetts Audubon Society Inc

To protect the nature of massachusetts for people and for wildlife through education, land conservation, advocacy, scientific research, and habitat stewardship/restoration.

Environment
5
Sacajawea Audubon Society

The mission of the Sacajawea Audubon Society is to build on an interest in birds to promote the conservation of our natural environment through enjoyment, education and action.

—
6
Waterbird Society

The waterbird society is composed of biologists, researchers, conservationists, students, and others interested in the behavior, ecology, and conservation of waterbirds. the organization is administered by officers and council members…

—
7
Salem Audubon Society

To promote the appreciation of nature and respect for natural places, focusing on birds and other wildlife, and fostering environmental responsibility with programs connecting people with nature.

Environment
8
Illinois Audubon Society

To promote the perpetuation and appreciation of native flora and fauna of illinois and the habitats that support them.

Environment
9
Nature Collective

Nature collective's mission is to drive a passion for nature for all. we think inclusively and diversely when serving those devoid of nature those who remember nature and want to connect back to it and those who have an affinity with…

Environment
10
National Ecological Observatory Network Inc
Recreation & Sports
11
Santa Barbara Audubon Society

Santa barbara audubon society protects area birdlife and habitat and connects people with birds through education, conservation, and science.

Environment
12
San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory

The San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory is dedicated to promote sustainability in the Bay Area and beyond by engaging communities in avian science, habitat restoration, and education.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Florida Audubon Society Inc and the most unlike its peers is William S Pardee Trust. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyEnvironmental Conservation …Community FoundationsCommunity College Foundatio…Health Access Advocacy and …Affordable Housing Developm…Immigrant Worker SupportUnited Way AffiliatesLocal Food System Organizat…
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 36 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%2%<5yr14%6%5–10yr19%12%10–20yr16%27%20–35yr13%32%35–55yr16%22%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%1%<5yr14%5%5–10yr19%22%10–20yr16%11%20–35yr13%32%35–55yr16%28%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.9% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.9%4/473
the rest of the field
13%
240,394/1,819,092

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

04the grantee network

265 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. 265 of the 474 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.

20
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
92
Early backer (in before they grew)
259/265
Grantees still filing
167/265
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

EAST PARK LEADERSHIP AND CONSERVATION CENTER — $4,341,140 · EnvironmentEAST PARK LEADERSHIP AND CONSERVATION CENTERDucks Unlimited Inc — $1,684,137 · EnvironmentDucks Unlimited IncALABAMA AUDUBON — $1,423,034 · EnvironmentALABAMA AUDUBONSan Diego Bird Alliance — $938,248 · EnvironmentBUENA VISTA AUDUBON SOCIETY — $894,436 · EnvironmentNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY ACTION FUND — $798,296 · Environment+76 more — $8,775,779 · Environment+76 moreSTATE OF UTAH GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT — $721,250 · OtherSTATE OF UTAH GOVERNOR'S OFFICE O…PENNSYLVANIA GAME COMMISSION — $679,942 · OtherPENNSYLVANIA GAME COMMISSIONFL DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION — $471,883 · OtherMiddle-Snake-Tamarac Rvrs Watershed Dstrct — $420,462 · OtherHOLT RANCH — $402,575 · OtherState of Arizona — $400,000 · OtherCITY OF ORANGE BEACH — $361,295 · Other+83 more — $6,655,661 · Other+83 moreHUNT HILL NATURE CENTER INC — $1,264,130 · AnimalsCENTER FOR AQUATIC SCIENCES — $316,556 · AnimalsTHE INSTITUTE FOR BIRD POPULATIONS — $178,745 · AnimalsFRIENDS OF THE HEINZ WILDLIFE REFUGE — $155,145 · AnimalsBirdability — $150,000 · AnimalsTucson Audubon Society — $111,021 · AnimalsNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION — $91,901 · Animals+1 more — $44,877 · AnimalsPROSPECT PARK ALLIANCE INC — $747,920 · Recreation & SportsAPPALACHIAN TRAIL CONSERVANCY — $107,247 · Recreation & SportsFargo Park District Foundation — $45,627 · Recreation & SportsTHE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE TULANE EDUCATIONAL FUND — $155,982 · EducationTHE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA FOUNDATION — $100,000 · EducationRUST COLLEGE — $86,800 · EducationCOLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION — $85,000 · EducationTHOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY — $85,000 · EducationMOREHOUSE COLLEGE — $51,775 · EducationPartnership for Responsible Growth Inc — $50,000 · EducationGEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC — $50,000 · EducationTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK — $41,689 · EducationTHE FUND FOR THE WATER WORKS — $165,000 · Arts & CultureHERITAGE CONSERVANCY INC — $149,316 · Arts & CultureIndependence Seaport Museum — $113,098 · Arts & CultureVENTURA AUDUBON SOCIETY — $66,049 · Arts & CultureNative Peoples Action Community Fund — $50,000 · Arts & CultureSMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION — $50,000 · Arts & CultureJilkaat Kwaan Heritage Center — $40,000 · Arts & CultureLower Ninth Ward Center for Sustainable Engagement and Development — $354,500 · Public Safety & Disaster
Environment$18,855,070Other$10,113,068Animals$2,312,375Recreation & Sports$900,794Education$706,246Arts & Culture$633,463Public Safety & Disaster$354,500

Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetDucks Unlimited Inc — $1,684,137 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetALABAMA AUDUBON — $1,423,034 over 9y, 39% of budgetSan Diego Bird Alliance — $938,248 over 9y, 13% of budgetBUENA VISTA AUDUBON SOCIETY — $894,436 over 5y, 52% of budgetNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY ACTION FUND — $798,296 over 1y, 50% of budgetPROSPECT PARK ALLIANCE INC — $747,920 over 9y, 0.8% of budgetMONTANA AUDUBON — $568,634 over 9y, 24% of budgetLower Ninth Ward Center for Sustainable Engagement and Development — $354,500 over 6y, 29% of budgetCENTER FOR AQUATIC SCIENCES — $316,556 over 9y, 4.2% of budgetBUFFALO AUDUBON SOCIETY INC — $308,953 over 9y, 19% of budgetAUDUBON OF KANSAS INC — $286,955 over 1y, 16% of budgetNEW YORK CITY BIRD ALLIANCE INC — $277,046 over 9y, 3.2% of budgetCONNECTICUT AUDUBON SOCIETY INC — $251,380 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetLOWCOUNTRY LAND TRUST INC — $245,258 over 3y, 4.0% of budgetBIRD ALLIANCE OF OREGON INC — $231,176 over 9y, 0.9% of budgetDELAWARE NATURE SOCIETY INC — $218,832 over 8y, 2.2% of budgetBirds Georgia Corporation — $211,994 over 9y, 5.9% of budgetFLORIDA AUDUBON SOCIETY INC — $208,500 over 9y, 7.2% of budgetPOCONO ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CENTER INC — $206,085 over 9y, 2.1% of budgetDetroit Bird Alliance — $204,969 over 9y, 21% of budgetTHE CLIMATE GROUP INC — $195,000 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $192,033 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIANS FOR CLEAN WATER AND SAFE PARKS SPONSORED BY CONSERVATION GROUPS — $185,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetTHE INSTITUTE FOR BIRD POPULATIONS — $178,745 over 4y, 2.4% of budgetTHE WATERSHED INSTITUTE INC — $167,984 over 8y, 1.2% of budgetTHE FUND FOR THE WATER WORKS — $165,000 over 9y, 3.1% of budgetCHESAPEAKE AUDUBON SOCIETY — $156,295 over 9y, 7.3% of budgetWILDLIFE INFORMATION CENTER INC — $156,151 over 8y, 5.3% of budgetTHE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE TULANE EDUCATIONAL FUND — $155,982 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE HEINZ WILDLIFE REFUGE — $155,145 over 9y, 44% of budgetCOASTAL EXPEDITIONS FOUNDATION — $152,500 over 3y, 41% of budgetBERKS NATURE — $152,341 over 9y, 0.9% of budgetOSPREY WILDS ENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING CENTER — $150,000 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetHERITAGE CONSERVANCY INC — $149,316 over 9y, 0.9% of budgetTHE JOHN BARTRAM ASSOCIATION — $144,725 over 8y, 1.8% of budgetThe Schuylkill Center For Environmental Education — $140,517 over 9y, 1.2% of budgetSCHUYLKILL RIVER GREENWAY ASSOCIATION — $139,899 over 9y, 1.0% of budgetAMERICAN CONSERVATION COALITION INC — $132,600 over 2y, 8.8% of budgetGolden Gate Bird Alliance Prev Golden Gate Audubon Society Inc — $131,799 over 9y, 3.1% of budgetCobbs Creek Community Environmental — $128,248 over 9y, 58% of budgetD&R GREENWAY LAND TRUST INC — $126,447 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetBIRDS CONNECT SEATTLE — $125,108 over 9y, 2.6% of budgetThe Community Foundation of Utah — $125,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTOOKANY TACONY FRANKFORD WATERSHED PARTN ERSHIP — $123,562 over 7y, 4.8% of budgetNEW JERSEY CONSERVATION FOUNDATION — $121,828 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetALASKA WILDERNESS LEAGUE — $120,500 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetCHICAGO BIRD ALLIANCE — $116,095 over 9y, 14% of budgetTravis Audubon Society Inc — $114,643 over 9y, 3.2% of budget
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 EAST PARK LEADERSHIP AND CONSERVATION CENTER ↗
  • Who funds Ducks Unlimited Inc ↗
  • Who funds ALABAMA AUDUBON ↗
  • Who funds HUNT HILL NATURE CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds San Diego Bird Alliance ↗
  • Who funds BUENA VISTA AUDUBON SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY ACTION FUND ↗
  • Who funds PROSPECT PARK ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds MONTANA AUDUBON ↗
  • Who funds Lower Ninth Ward Center for Sustainable Engagement and Development ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR AQUATIC SCIENCES ↗
  • Who funds BUFFALO AUDUBON SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds AUDUBON OF KANSAS INC ↗
  • Who funds NEW YORK CITY BIRD ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds CONNECTICUT AUDUBON SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds LOWCOUNTRY LAND TRUST INC ↗
  • Who funds BIRD ALLIANCE OF OREGON INC ↗
  • Who funds DELAWARE NATURE SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds Birds Georgia Corporation ↗
  • Who funds FLORIDA AUDUBON SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds POCONO ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds Detroit Bird Alliance ↗
  • Who funds THE CLIMATE GROUP INC ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds CALIFORNIANS FOR CLEAN WATER AND SAFE PARKS SPONSORED BY CONSERVATION GROUPS ↗
  • Who funds THE INSTITUTE FOR BIRD POPULATIONS ↗
  • Who funds THE WATERSHED INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds THE FUND FOR THE WATER WORKS ↗

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.

National Fish and Wil…The Nature ConservancyNational Wildlife Fed…Environmental Defense…PatagoniaorgResources Legacy FundIndependence Seaport …Natural Resources Def…United States Energy …Schumann Robert F Fdn…The Trust for Public …The Pew Charitable Tr…
National Fish and Wildlife FoundationDC53.7× affinity76 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · National Wildlife Federation · Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated · Patagoniaorg · Resources Legacy Fund · Independence Seaport Museum · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · United States Energy Foundation · Schumann Robert F Fdn-Main · The Trust for Public Land · The Pew Charitable Trusts

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 National Audubon Society 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 80%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 9%
  • New Haven - Urban Resources Initiative Inc — 100% of income from government
  • Vermont Youth Conservation Corps Inc — 47% of income from government
  • Delaware Nature Society Inc — 13% of income from government
  • Manomet Inc — 12% of income from government
  • D&r Greenway Land Trust Inc — 9% of income from government
  • New Haven Ecology Project Inc — 9% of income from government
  • The Watershed Institute Inc — 3% of income from government
  • Connecticut Audubon Society Inc — 1% of income from government
  • Bird Alliance of Oregon Inc — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
8get no government money at all
39report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 474 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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