Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Nelson Family Foundation

Its FY2019 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$270k
Granted FY2019
1
Grants FY2019
1
States reached
$270k
Largest
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 FY20172019.

Animals$403kEnvironment$16kHuman Services$3kFood & Nutrition$2kEducation$1k
02FY2019 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$270,487
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
IVAN CARTER WILDLIFE CONS ALLIANCE$270,487
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 (FY17–18, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF MONTGOMERY CTY: $2k → 9%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF MONTGOMERY CTY: $1k → 9%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

NY
OH
CA
NE
VA
TN
SC
DC
TX
FL

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.

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.

10%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$42k · 4 repeat orgs$383k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2019, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
9

Total granted

$42k
$112k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+62%
+89%

Still filing today

50%
78%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2019, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $270k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19
AnimalsEnvironmentFood & NutritionHuman ServicesOther

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

  • PS
    PANTHERA SAVE THE TIGER
    2× · 2017–2018 · $29k
  • TT
    THR TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND
    2× · 2017–2018 · $5k
  • WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $5k · revenue +62%

Funded once

  • TI
    THE IVAN CARTER WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ALLIANCE INC
    one grant, 2018 · $100k · revenue -26%
  • TU
    TROUT UNLIMITED INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $4k · revenue +133%
  • IP
    INTERNATIONAL PRIMATE PROTECTION LEAGUEgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $2k · revenue +73%

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
African Wildlife Foundation Inc

Awf's mission is to ensure wildlife and wild lands thrive in modern africa. we work to equip african governments, institutions, business, and communities with the tools, insights, and support they need to define, own, and realize a…

Animals
2
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
3
Panthera Corporation

Panthera's mission is the conservation of the world's 40 wild cat species, many of which are endangered or threatened. panthera develops, implements and oversees wild cat conservation strategies on a global scale.

Animals
4
Wildlife Alliance Inc

Wildlife alliance is the leader in direct protection of forests and wildlife in tropical asia. our mission is to combat deforestation, biodiversity loss, climate change, and poverty by partnering with local communities and governments.…

Animals
5
Wildlife Conservation Society

The wildlife conservation society (wcs) saves wildlife and wild places worldwide through science, conservation action, education, and inspiring people to value nature.

Animals
6
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
7
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
8
Rainforest Trust

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

International
9
Wild Landscapes Inc

Wild landscapes, inc. (wli) is dedicated to conserving large and connected landscapes globally significant to wildlife and crucial to local communities. our environmental conservation strategy is to empower communities, conservationists,…

Animals
10
International Snow Leopard Trust

The international snow leopard trust aims to ethically conserve snow leopards and their high mountain ecosystems through partnerships with indigenous peoples and local communities, and through research to improve the understanding of snow…

Animals
11
International Conservation Caucus Network

To advance conservation governance through political will and to provide "on the ground" solutions to ensure sustained economic benefits while managing the earth's natural resource wealth for future generations.

Unclassified
12
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.

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Nature Conservancy and the most unlike its peers is Assistance League of Montgomery County. 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

10 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 15 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
9/10
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

IVAN CARTER WILDLIFE CONS ALLIANCE — $270,487 · OtherIVAN CARTER WILDLIFE CONS ALLIANCEPANTHERA SAVE THE TIGER — $29,000 · OtherPANTHERA SAVE THE TIGER+5 more — $9,000 · OtherTHE IVAN CARTER WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ALLIANCE INC — $100,000 · AnimalsTHE IVAN CARTER WILDLIFE CON…TROUT UNLIMITED INC — $4,000 · Animals+2 more — $4,000 · AnimalsWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC — $4,500 · EnvironmentNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION — $200 · EnvironmentAssistance League of Montgomery County — $3,000 · Human ServicesTHE WESTON A PRICE FOUNDATION — $1,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$308,487Animals$108,000Environment$4,700Human Services$3,000Food & Nutrition$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC — $4,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTROUT UNLIMITED INC — $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAssistance League of Montgomery County — $3,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetINTERNATIONAL PRIMATE PROTECTION LEAGUE — $2,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION — $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMONTGOMERY COUNTY FOOD BANK INC — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE WESTON A PRICE FOUNDATION — $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION — $200 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO6.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Nelson Family 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report 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, FY2025

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Nelson Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Nelson Family 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 15 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph