Skip to content
Nonprofit Partners Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Community foundation

Nonprofit Partners Inc

The mission of nonprofit partners is to provide charitable organizations and individuals who want to support nonprofits, grassroots projects, and large-scale initiatives the support and capacity to work for community good.

$1.9M
Granted FY2025still arriving
44
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$91k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01FY2025 · 44 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k24 grants · $606k
  • $50k–250k19 grants · $1.3M
$40,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILIT$91,000
CENTER FOR COALFIELD JUSTICE$86,000
THREE RIVERS WATERKEEPER INC$81,000
FRIENDS OF BLACKWATER INC$75,000
CITIZENS' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATION$75,000
WEST VIRGINIA CITIZEN ACTION EDUCAT$75,000
BLACK WOMEN RISING INC$75,000
BUCKEYE ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK$75,000
BEAVER COUNTY MARCELLUS AWARENESS C$74,539
PROTECT PT$70,500
GROUP AGAINST SMOG AND POLLUTION I$70,000
CITIZENS COAL COUNCIL$64,000
WOMEN FOR A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT$60,250
VALLEY CLEAN AIR NOW (VCAN)$60,250
FACT-FAITH COMMUNITIES TOGETHER FOR$60,000
02The need
02

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY25–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 81% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%DELAWARE RIVERKEEPER NETWORK: $16k → 6%PENNSYLVANIA INTERFAITH POWER & LIG: $31k → 9%PROTECT PT: $71k → 10%BEAVER COUNTY MARCELLUS AWARENESS C: $75k → 10%WOMEN FOR A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT: $60k → 11%CENTER FOR COALFIELD JUSTICE: $86k → 12%PENNFUTURE: $15k → 12%CITIZENS' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATION: $75k → 13%SEEDS (SUSTAINABLE ENERGY EDUCATION: $30k → 13%PENNSYLVANIA ACTION ON CLIMATE: $25k → 14%PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILIT: $91k → 22%SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $15k → 10%FOOD & WATER WATCH: $16k → 14%MIDWEST BUILDING DECARBONIZATION CO: $20k → 8%COMMON GROUND EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $20k → 14%GREEN DOOR INITIATIVE: $20k → 21%FACT-FAITH COMMUNITIES TOGETHER FOR: $60k → 9%THE BIG LOVE NETWORK: $15k → 13%BUCKEYE ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK: $75k → 15%BLACK WOMEN RISING INC: $75k → 18%RISING APPALACHIA: $50k → 22%OHIO VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES: $50k → 13%GUARDIANS OF THE WEST FORK WATERSHE: $15k → 15%FRIENDS OF BLACKWATER INC: $75k → 16%WEST VIRGINIA CITIZEN ACTION EDUCAT: $75k → 18%MID-OHIO VALLEY CLIMATE ACTION: $24k → 19%COAL RIVER MOUNTAIN WATCH: $30k → 20%FRIENDS OF THE TUG FORK RIVER: $58k → 31%ALLEGHENY-BLUE RIDGE ALLIANCE: $30k → 13%RIVERWISE INC: $50k → 10%FAIR SHAKE ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL SERV: $40k → 11%CITIZENS COAL COUNCIL: $64k → 12%CLEAN AIR COUNCIL: $35k → 22%MICHIGAN INTERFAITH POWER & LIGHT: $20k → 21%WEST VIRGINIA RIVERS COALITION INC: $40k → 18%VALLEY CLEAN AIR NOW (VCAN): $60k → 11%CLEAN AIR COUNCIL: $15k → 22%412 JUSTICE: $40k → 11%GROUP AGAINST SMOG AND POLLUTION I: $70k → 11%THREE RIVERS WATERKEEPER INC: $81k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
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.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Western Resource Advocates

Western Resource Advocates (WRA) is a regional nonprofit advocacy organization fighting climate change and its impacts to sustain the environment, economy, and people of the West. As the region's go-to experts for more than three decades,…

Crime & Legal
2
Penns Valley Conservation Association

To serve as a steward for the natural and cultural communities in the upper Penns Creek Watershed. We seek to preserve and Honor the agricultural roots of Penns Valley by protecting and conserving its waters, farmland, forests and rural…

Environment
3
Appalachian Voices

Appalachian voices brings people together to protect the land, air, and water of central and southern appalachia and advance a just transition to a generative and equitable clean energy economy.

Environment
4
Coalfield Justice Action

To invest in the people and policies that impact historic and active fossil fuel communities, and to promote an equitable, healthy, sustainable future for our region.

Public Benefit
5
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
6
The James River Basin Partnership

To improve and protect the water quality in the james river watershed and table rock lake.

Environment
7
Western Pa Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation

To encourage and implement the reclamation of abandoned mine lands and degraded waters of western pennsylvania

Environment
8
Pennsylvania Environmental Council Inc

The pennsylvania environmental council (pec) protects and restores the natural and built environments through innovation, collaboration, education, and advocacy. pec believes in the value of partnerships with the private sector,…

Environment
9
The Clearwater Conservancy of Central Pennsylvania Inc

To conserve and restore the natural resources through land conservation, water resources stewardship and environmental outreach across central pennsylvania.

Environment
10
Great Basin Resource Watch

Natural resource protection: Protected communities and the environment from the negative impacts of mineral development; provided support to communities impacted by mining

Environment
11
Earthworks

The Corporation is organized exclusively for charitable and educational purposes. Earthworks is dedicated to protecting communities and the environment from the impacts of irresponsible mineral and energy development while seeking…

Public Benefit
12
Allegheny County Conservation District

The Allegheny County Conservation District is an urban conservation district that engages and leads through partnerships, innovation, and implementation to conserve, promote, and improve Allegheny Countys natural resources.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Center for Coalfield Justice; the most unlike its peers is Rising Appalachia. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

34 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 34 of the 43 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
34/34
Grantees still filing
14/34
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CENTER FOR COALFIELD JUSTICE: $86,000 · EnvironmentCENTER FOR COALFIELD JUSTICETHREE RIVERS WATERKEEPER: $81,000 · EnvironmentTHREE RIVERS WATERKEEPERBUCKEYE ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK: $75,000 · EnvironmentBUCKEYE ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORKCITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATION OF THE SLIPPERY ROCK AREA INC: $75,000 · EnvironmentCITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATION OF THE SLIPPERY ROCK AREA IN…FRIENDS OF BLACKWATER INC: $75,000 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF BLACKWATER INCBEAVER COUNTY MARCELLUS AWARENESS COMMUNITY: $74,539 · EnvironmentBEAVER COUNTY MARCELLUS AWARENESS COMMUNITYGROUP AGAINST SMOG AND POLLUTION INC: $70,000 · EnvironmentGROUP AGAINST SMOG AND POLLUTION INCCITIZENS COAL COUNCIL: $64,000 · EnvironmentCITIZENS COAL COUNCILVALLEY CLEAN AIR NOW: $60,250 · EnvironmentVALLEY CLEAN AIR NOWWOMEN FOR A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT: $60,250 · EnvironmentWOMEN FOR A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENTRISING APPALACHIA: $50,000 · EnvironmentClean Air Council: $49,800 · EnvironmentWEST VIRGINIA RIVERS COALITION INC: $40,000 · Environment+9 more: $205,500 · Environment+9 moreFACT-FAITH COMMUNITIES TOGETHER FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE: $60,000 · OtherFACT-FAITH COMMUNITIES T…FRIENDS OF THE TUG FORK RIVER: $58,045 · OtherFRIENDS OF THE TUG FORK …OHIO VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES INC: $50,000 · OtherOHIO VALLEY ENVIRONMENTA…GRANTS 500000: $44,837 · OtherGRANTS 500000SEEDS: $30,000 · OtherSEEDSMARCELLUS OUTREACH BUTLER: $24,745 · OtherMARCELLUS OUTREACH BUTLE…MID-OHIO VALLEY CLIMATE ACTION: $24,350 · OtherMID-OHIO VALLEY CLIMATE …COMMON GROUND EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $20,000 · OtherDELAWARE RIVERKEEPER NETWORK: $16,000 · OtherBIG LOVE NETWORK: $15,000 · OtherMICHIGAN INTERFAITH POWER & LIGHT INC: $20,000 · OtherTIDES FOUNDATION: $20,000 · OtherFOOD & WATER WATCH: $16,000 · Other+1 more: $7,000 · OtherPROMOTE PT: $70,500 · Community ImprovementRiverwise Inc: $50,000 · Community ImprovementWEST VIRGINIA CITIZEN ACTION EDUCATION FUND: $75,000 · Education412 JUSTICE: $40,000 · EducationPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY PENNSYLVANIA: $91,000 · HealthBlack Appalachian Coalition: $75,000 · Civil RightsFAIR SHAKE ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL SERVICES: $40,000 · Crime & Legal
Environment$1,066,339Other$405,977Community Improvement$120,500Education$115,000Health$91,000Civil Rights$75,000Crime & Legal$40,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY PENNSYLVANIA: $91,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetCENTER FOR COALFIELD JUSTICE: $86,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetTHREE RIVERS WATERKEEPER: $81,000 over 1y, 8.2% of budgetGROUP AGAINST SMOG AND POLLUTION INC: $70,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetCITIZENS COAL COUNCIL: $64,000 over 1y, 41% of budgetWOMEN FOR A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT: $60,250 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetClean Air Council: $49,800 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetWEST VIRGINIA RIVERS COALITION INC: $40,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetThe Green Door Initiative: $20,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetMIDWEST BUILDING DECARBONIZATION COALITION: $20,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetFOOD & WATER WATCH: $16,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCITIZENS FOR PENNSYLVANIA'S FUTURE: $15,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCarnegie Mellon University: $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Heinz EndowmentsCommunity Foundation …United States Energy …The Pittsburgh Founda…The New World Foundat…PatagoniaorgResources Legacy FundThe Schmidt Family Fo…Tides FoundationRockefeller Family Fu…Rockefeller Philanthr…Sierra Club
The Heinz EndowmentsPA31.2× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Heinz Endowments · Community Foundation of Greater Johnstown · United States Energy Foundation · The Pittsburgh Foundation · The New World Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Resources Legacy Fund · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Tides Foundation · Rockefeller Family Fund Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Sierra Club

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Nonprofit Partners Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Nonprofit Partners Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's 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
    10report 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, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Nonprofit Partners Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Nonprofit Partners Inc 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 43 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

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

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Nonprofit Partners’ filings →

    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