Skip to content
Oceana Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Oceana Inc

To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.

$1.1M
Granted FY2020
6
Grants FY2020
2
States reached
$180k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

52% of Oceana Inc’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Tides Center, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 2 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2020, the last year Oceana Inc named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $479k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

5
’17
3
’18
3
’19
6
’20
4
’21
3
’22
6
’23
2
’24

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Environment$5.4MInternational$771kArts & Culture$368kHuman Services$221kEducation$161kCivil Rights$156kFood & Nutrition$82kCommunity Improvement$8k
02FY2020 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $479,297, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,115,958 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $636,661 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2020

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $69k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $410k
$50,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$62M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WORLD WILDLIFE FUND (WWF)$180,000
CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES INC (CSIS)$180,000
CLEAN COASTS CLEAN WATER CLEAN STREETS$50,000
AMERICAN UNIVERSITY$34,297
SURF INDUSTRY MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION (SIMA)$20,000
SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK OF ORANGE COUNTY$15,000
02The need
03

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:

Its human-services grants (FY21–24, $368k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%TIDES CENTER (ICAR): $165k → 10%TIDES CENTER (ICAR): $90k → 10%TIDES CENTER (ICAR): $56k → 10%TIDES CENTER (ICAR): $56k → 10%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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
NY
MA
NJ
CA
CO
WV
MD
DC

Grants abroad, by region: $791k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$399k · 50% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: SUBGRANT TO SUPPORT THE COALITION FOR FISHERIES TRANSPARENCY, INCLUDING BY CO-CHAIRING THE COALITION AND ALLOCATING EJF STAFF TIME TO ADVANCE THE COALITION'S ADVOCACY EFFORTS. · EDUCATE INDIVIDUALS AND MEMBERS OF THE SAILING AND BOATING COMMUNITY TOWARD RESTORING OCEAN HEALTH

North America (Canada and Mexico)$375k · 47% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: SUPPORT OCEANA CANADA'S ACTIVITIES TO PRESERVE AND RESTORE THE BOUNTY OF THE OCEAN AND PROTECT OCEAN RESOURCES IMPORTANT FOR THE ECONOMY AND COMMUNITIES.

South America$17k · 2% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: CONSOLIDATE A COMMERCIALIZATION & MARKETING MODEL FOR SOUTHERN HAKE IN COMMUNITIES IN THE AYSEN REGION · EQUIPMENT FOR BLUE NATURE ALLIANCE OFFICE · SUPPORT THE 7TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM OF STOCK ENHANCEMENT AND SEA RANCHING 2024.

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 11% of Oceana Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Oceana Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 2.8% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

82%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.3M · 6 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2020, 2 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call). Read against FY2020, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
6

Total granted

$5.3M
$1.0M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
+141%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentInternationalEducationArts & CultureFood & NutritionPhilanthropyOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • GF
    GLOBAL FISHING WATCH INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $3.6M · revenue ×12
  • CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
    5× · 2020–2024 · $771k · revenue +6%
  • WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC
    3× · 2020–2022 · $565k · revenue +28%

Funded once

  • S
    SKYTRUTHgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $657k · revenue +141% · 40% of their budget
  • TW
    THE WALDEN WOODS PROJECTgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $200k · revenue +236%
  • BO
    BRING ON THE MUSIC INC
    one grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue +9%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its 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
Conservation International Foundation

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

Environment
2
Oceana Inc

To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.

Environment
3
Ocean Conservancy

Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.

Environment
4
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
5
United States Naval Institute

Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.

—
6
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
7
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
8
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
9
Wildaid Inc

Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.

Animals
10
Marine Conservation Biology Institute

Marine conservation institute is dedicated to securing permanent, strong protection for the oceans' most important places for us and future generations.

Education
11
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.": - count it: our work is…

International
12
Cdp North America Inc

Cdp north america, inc. 's ("cdp-na") vision for the future is a thriving economy that works for people and planet in the long term. we focus investors and companies on taking urgent action to build a truly sustainable economy by measuring…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Marine Sanctuary Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Shorefast Us Fund. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

21 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.

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

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/21
Grantees still filing
17/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GLOBAL FISHING WATCH INC: $3,648,707 · EnvironmentGLOBAL FISHING WATCH INCSKYTRUTH: $657,158 · EnvironmentSKYTRUTHWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $565,000 · EnvironmentWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC+5 more: $69,500 · EnvironmentCENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: $771,250 · InternationalCENTER FOR S…+1 more: $7,540 · InternationalTHE CAMPANILE FOUNDATION: $126,988 · EducationAMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $101,979 · EducationBRING ON THE MUSIC INC: $100,000 · EducationPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $51,790 · EducationTIDES CENTER: $367,500 · Human ServicesROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $267,847 · PhilanthropySIMA ENVIRONMENTAL FUND: $40,000 · PhilanthropySURF INDUSTRY MEMBERS ASSOCIATION: $175,000 · OtherCLEAN COASTS CLEAN WATER CLEAN STREETS ENVIRONMENTALISTS RECYCLERS AND FARMER: $50,000 · OtherTHE WALDEN WOODS PROJECT: $200,000 · Arts & CultureSECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK OF ORANGE COUNTY INC: $15,000 · Food & Nutrition
Environment$4,940,365International$778,790Education$380,757Human Services$367,500Philanthropy$307,847Other$225,000Arts & Culture$200,000Food & Nutrition$15,000

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 budgetGLOBAL FISHING WATCH INC: $3,648,707 over 2y, 9.5% of budgetCENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: $771,250 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetSKYTRUTH: $657,158 over 1y, 40% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $565,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $367,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $267,847 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE WALDEN WOODS PROJECT: $200,000 over 1y, 8.4% of budgetSURF INDUSTRY MEMBERS ASSOCIATION: $175,000 over 6y, 20% of budgetTHE CAMPANILE FOUNDATION: $126,988 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $101,979 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBRING ON THE MUSIC INC: $100,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $51,790 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCLEAN COASTS CLEAN WATER CLEAN STREETS ENVIRONMENTALISTS RECYCLERS AND FARMER: $50,000 over 1y, 3.5% of budgetSIMA ENVIRONMENTAL FUND: $40,000 over 1y, 7.0% of budgetEarth Island Institute Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK OF ORANGE COUNTY INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY FOUNDATION: $12,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGREEN CORPS INC: $12,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $10,000 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 David and Lucile …Rockefeller Philanthr…Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The David and Lucile Packard FoundationCA13.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Oceana Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Oceana Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • National Marine Sanctuary Foundation: 88% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
  • The Walden Woods Project: 6% of 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)
1rely 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.

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 21 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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Oceana’s 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