· Public charity
National Energy Education Development Project Inc
The mission of the national energy education development project, inc.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 79% of NATIONAL ENERGY EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 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.
The 44 grants below total $2,115,391 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $3,646,414 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $1,531,023 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 $10k2 grants · $11k
- $10k–50k21 grants · $410k
- $50k–250k21 grants · $1.7M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CITY OF LYNN | $145,000 |
| CITY OF BROCKTON | $120,000 |
| FRANKLIN REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS | $120,000 |
| TOWN OF GROTON | $120,000 |
| CITY OF QUINCY | $117,500 |
| TOWN OF WESTHAMPTON | $87,263 |
| TOWN OF RANDOLPH | $85,000 |
| CITY OF WOBURN | $80,000 |
| PIONEER VALLEY PLANNING COMM | $79,128 |
| ROANOKE CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS | $75,000 |
| CITY OF FALL RIVER | $74,400 |
| CITY OF LEOMINSTER | $62,400 |
| CITY OF EVERETT | $60,000 |
| TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER | $60,000 |
| CITY OF TAUNTON | $60,000 |
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 (FY22–25, $196k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 60% 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.
11 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 35 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 6% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.0M 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
GREEN BEVERLY 107Q INC2× · 2024–2025 · $48k · revenue +23%- CACAPE AND ISLANDS SELF-RELIANCE CORPORATION INC2× · 2023–2025 · $25k · revenue +15%
- NENEW ECOLOGY INC2× · 2023–2025 · $25k · revenue +5%
Funded once
- SSSA SOLAR HOLDCO 2022 LLCone grant, 2022 · $125k
- SFSECURE FUTURES LLCone grant, 2022 · $89k
- MCMERCER CO BD OF EDUCATIONone grant, 2023 · $63k
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 organization's mission is to advocate for policy that meets the scale and urgency of our environmental challenges. as a massachusetts-based organization that engages in advocacy across a full spectrum of climate, environmental, and…
Ace builds the power of communities of color and low-income communities in massachusetts to eradicate environmental racism and classism, create healthy, sustainable communities, and achieve environmental justice.
American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…
Montgomery county green bank corporation is making energy efficiency and clean energy attainable for all in our community and creating a more sustainable and resilient future.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Building a movement of diverse, upwardly mobile college grads overcoming underemployment through digital skills and peer connections.
To enable the commercialization of energy technologies that positively contribute to economic competitiveness, energy security, and the environment.
Massachusetts education and career opportunities, inc. (massedco, inc.) is a statewide network of service sites that provides education and career advising to over 12,000 low-income, first generation individuals each year. massedco…
Ceres is a nonprofit advocacy organization working to accelerate the transition to a cleaner, more just, and resilient world. through education and research, we make the business case for action on the most pressing sustainability…
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
To provide energy cost savings to low-income homeowners through installation of solar electric systems and training in energy efficiency, while providing hands-on solar installation opportunities to job training organizations and community…
Green Cambridge strives to create a more sustainable city protect the environment and educate youth and adults about the importance of environmental issue.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is South Middlesex Opportunity Council Inc and the most unlike its peers is Oakland Hebrew Day School. 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.
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 33 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
46 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. 46 of the 91 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 PIONEER VALLEY PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds RESIST INC ↗
- Who funds GREEN BEVERLY 107Q INC ↗
- Who funds CLEAN WATER FUND ↗
- Who funds Cambodian Mutual Assistance Association of Greater Lowell Inc ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR ENERGY WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT ↗
- Who funds AFTER-SCHOOL ALL-STARS ↗
- Who funds CAPE AND ISLANDS SELF-RELIANCE CORPORATION INC ↗
- Who funds BETTER FUTURE PROJECT INC ↗
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: Center for Technology and Civic Life · Project Lead the Way Inc · Project Bread-The Walk for Hunger Inc · Health Resources in Action Inc · United Way Of Massachusetts Bay Inc · United Way of Greater Philadelphia and Southern New Jersey · Boston Foundation Inc · Eastern Bank Foundation · Project Lead the Way Inc · Barr Foundation · Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · The Philadelphia Foundation
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 Energy Education Development Project 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Project Right — 71% of income from government
- Quincy Asian Resources Inc — 43% of income from government
- Community Workshops Inc — 39% of income from government
- Asian American Civic Association Inc — 19% of income from government
- South Middlesex Opportunity Council Inc — 18% of income from government
- MassEnergize Inc — 11% of income from government
- Manship Artist Residence and Studios Inc — 5% of income from government
- Resist Inc — 2% of income from government
- New Ecology Inc — 1% of income from government
- Worcester Common Ground Inc — 1% of income from government
- Green Beverly 107Q Inc — 1% of income from government
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.