· Private foundation
Nature Defense Foundation
Its FY2020 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2020.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2020
- Under $10k15 grants · $78k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $70k
- $250k+1 grant · $434k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SINDISA SANCTUARY | $433,525 |
| RETURN TO FREEDOM INC | $70,000 |
| GENERATION AWAKENING | $10,000 |
| DIRECT ACTION EVERYWHERE | $7,500 |
| BEST FRIEND OF AMIMAL SOCIETY | $5,000 |
| ANIMAL RECOVERY MISSION | $5,000 |
| WILDCARE | $5,000 |
| SHADOW'S FUND | $5,000 |
| HUMAN SOCIETY OF SONOMA | $5,000 |
| FOUR PAWS INTERNATIONAL | $5,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL MEDIA ASSOCIATION | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| FRIENDS OF THE EARTH | $5,000 |
| SPCA INTERNATIONAL | $5,000 |
| COMMMWEALTH | $5,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–20) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 19% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
3 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2020, 1 since wound down; 16 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (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 FY2020, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $88k 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
- NDNATURE DEFENSE FOUNDATION4× · 2017–2020 · $2.1M · revenue -45% · 97% of their budget
- EAELEPHANT AID INTERNATIONAL3× · 2017–2019 · $462k
- RTRETURN TO FREEDOM INC4× · 2017–2020 · $165k · revenue +57%
Funded once
- OPOceanic Preservation Societygraduatedone grant, 2019 · $50k · revenue +35%
- AHANIMAL HOPE AND WELLNESS FOUNDATIONone grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue -69%
- ALANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +55%
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.
World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…
Peace 4 animals animal welfare organization supports the conservation of endangered species worldwide. we work on campaigns to promote advocacy and education on how to protect wildlife in peril, as well as the preservation of their natural…
Animal outlook is a national animal protection organization working to end the abuse of farmed animals using a variety of strategies, including investigations, legal advocacy, corporate and food system reform, and vegan outreach.
Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…
The organization works to create a world where all animals have their freedom respected by society and protected in law.
To pass animal protection laws, educate the public, and support humane candidates for office.
To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.
We seek to end animal agriculture by rescuing farmed animals, giving them lifelong care and sanctuary, and educating about the harms of animal farming.
HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mercy for Animals Inc and the most unlike its peers is Nature Defense Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
20 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. 20 of the 28 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 NATURE DEFENSE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RETURN TO FREEDOM INC ↗
- Who funds Oceanic Preservation Society ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL HOPE AND WELLNESS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE CORAL REEF ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Nonhuman Rights Project Inc ↗
- Who funds THE DAVID SHELDRICK WILDLIFE TRUST USA INC ↗
- Who funds MERCY FOR ANIMALS INC ↗
- Who funds GENERATION AWAKENING ↗
- Who funds DIRECT ACTION EVERYWHERE ↗
- Who funds WILDCARE ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE EARTH ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL RECOVERY MISSION INC ↗
- Who funds Peaceful Valley Donkey Rescue Inc ↗
- Who funds THE ENVIRONMENTAL MEDIA ASSOCIATIONINC ↗
- Who funds THE WHALE SANCTUARY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds FOUR PAWS INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds SPCA INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds SHADOWS FUND INCORPORATED ↗
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: Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Nature Defense 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Nature Defense Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Nature Defense 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.