How much did NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION grant in FY2024?

NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION reported 125 grants totaling $13,283,295 in its FY2024 IRS filing.

Where is NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION based?

NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION is based in MT.

NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION

Foundation Dossiers Also receives grants — funding profile →

· Public charity

NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION

The foundation, chartered by congress as the official non-profit partner of the us forest service, engages americans in community based and national programs that promote the health and public enjoyment of the 193 million acre national forest system.

$13M

Granted FY2024

125

Grants

Communities

$1.9M

Largest

01What you fund

0182% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2018–2024.

Environment$25MYouth Development$7.7MRecreation & Sports$3.0MEducation$2.0MAnimals$1.5MPublic Safety & Disaster$861kEmployment$670kCommunity Improvement$419kScience & Tech$394kOther$11M

02FY2024 · 125 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k5 grants · $34k
$10k–50k66 grants · $1.6M
$50k–250k42 grants · $5.3M
$250k+12 grants · $6.3M

$38,000

Median grant

States reached

$93M

Total assets

Largest grants

CONSERVATION LEGACY$1,943,515
ECOCULTURE$602,943
CITY OF GREELEY$589,153
TROUT UNLIMITED INC$529,405
TRUCKEE RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL$512,434
SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS RESERVE$418,207
ROCKY MOUNTAIN YOUTH CORPS - CO$315,055
COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY$284,414
MOUNTAIN COMMUNITIES FIRE SAFE COUNCIL$283,180
RIO GRANDE RETURN$281,883
TREE PEOPLE$268,630
CONFEDERATED SALISH & KOOTENAI TRIBES$261,399
FRIENDS OF DILLON RANGER DISTRICT$244,000
THE EMBER ALLIANCE$240,240
BIG THOMPSON WATERSHED COALITION$234,988

02The need

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 (FY18–23, $205k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15% — the area typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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 line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$45M · 171 repeat orgs$7.3M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +92% since the first grant, against +62% for the ones you funded once.

171 repeat relationships — 82 still active in FY2024, 89 since wound down; 43 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

171

Total granted

$45M

$3.7M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+92%

+62%

Still filing today

87%

73%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.6M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EnvironmentRecreation & SportsYouth DevelopmentAnimalsEducationCommunity 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

CONSERVATION LEGACY
7× · 2018–2024 · $4.0M · revenue +161%
RM
ROCKY MTN YOUTH CORP-CO
7× · 2018–2024 · $2.0M · revenue +235%
AC
AMERICAN CONSERVATION EXPERIENCE
7× · 2018–2024 · $1.7M · revenue +168%

Funded once

BS
BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY
one grant, 2023 · $346k
GB
GREAT BASIN INSTITUTEgraduated
one grant, 2019 · $316k · revenue +237%
WT
WASHOE TRIBE OF NV AND CA
one grant, 2023 · $269k

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.

Rocky Mountain Wild

Rocky mountain wild works to protect, connect, and restore wildlife and wild lands in the southern rocky mountain region. we work to secure the biodiversity of the mountains, plains, and desert ecosystems of colorado, wyoming, utah, and…

Environment

CalWild

CalWild protects our state's drinking water and wild places by seeking new protections for streams and natural areas on public lands. Current campaigns include: the Sierra Forests, NW CA, the Desert, the San Gabriel Mts and the Central…

—

Roaring Fork Valley Wildfire Collaborative

Our mission is to reduce wildfire risk by identifying, prioritizing, and implementing strategic cross-boundary plans and projects aimed at creating fire-resilient landscapes and fire-adapted communities.

Environment

Cascadia Wildlands

Cascadia wildands defends and restores cascadia'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

Beaverhead Trails Coalition

Enhancement and development of trails on public lands in Beaverhead County

Environment

Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council

The Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council is a local nonprofit organization that strives to enhance and restore habitat for fish and wildlife our community and for future generations. Our Board of Directors consists of seven members with…

Environment

Sierra Watch

Sierra watch secures conservation outcomes to protect the natural resources, mountain communities, and timeless values of the tahoe sierra.

Environment

Wyoming Outdoor Council

The wyoming outdoor council's mission is to protect wyoming's environment and quality of life now and for future generations

Environment

Washington Wild

Protects and restores wild lands and waters in washington state through advocacy, education and civic engagement.

Animals

Gallatin Watershed Council Inc

The Gallatin Watershed Council guides collaborative watershed stewardship in the Gallatin Valley for a healthy and productive landscape.

Environment

Northern California Regional Land Trust

Conservation of agricultural lands, open space, wildlife habitat and natural resources within butte, glenn, and tehama counties.

Environment

Methow Valley Trails Collaborative

Enhancing sustainable trail experiences in the Methow Valley.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cascade Forest Conservancy and the most unlike its peers is Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum. 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.

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 27 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

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 — 1.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

1.0%3/313

the rest of the field

11%

206,161/1,819,252

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

263 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

150

Early backer (in before they grew)

255/263

Grantees still filing

227/263

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Environment$24,948,192Other$12,475,026Youth Development$7,663,201Recreation & Sports$2,984,957Education$2,015,520Animals$1,493,908Public Safety & Disaster$860,679

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.

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 Wilderness Stewardship AllianceCO93.3× affinity43 shared granteesties to 10 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Wilderness Stewardship Alliance · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Resources Legacy Fund · The Nature Conservancy · The Wilderness Society · National Park Foundation · Wilburforce Foundation · Bass Pro Shops & Cabelas Outdoor Fund · River Network · The Corps Network · Western Conservation 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 organisation NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION 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

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

4get no government money at all

4rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: IDAHO FOREST RESTORATION PARTNERSHIP.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~73 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 4 filed years.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

4 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 2.7× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 850588008 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on IDAHO FOREST RESTORATION PARTNERSHIP, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 73 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 95% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to National Forest Foundation?

Find your warmest path to National Forest Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

263 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to National Forest Foundation?

More from the funding graph

NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

263 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to National Forest Foundation?

More from the funding graph