How much did PACIFIC FOREST & WATERSHED LANDS grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 71% of PACIFIC FOREST & WATERSHED LANDS’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

loi conservationconservation easementsnegotiationsierra foothillfoothill conservancydistrict landownermaidu summit

2019

enhancementnegotiation feeloi conservationconservation easementsbaseline documentationdocumentation reportdistrict landowner

2020

boundary surveyland feesland enhancementsplacerresource conservationconservation districttax neutrality

2021

land enhancementssierra conservancyendowmenttax neutralityfeather riverriver landshasta land

2022

placer titleland enhancementssierra conservancytax neutralityendowmentshasta

2023

placer titleland enhancementsendowmentshastatax neutrality

2024

—

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$947,872

Median grant

States reached

Total assets

Largest grants

SIERRA NEVADA CONSERVANCY$947,872

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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY18–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 10% — the area typically sits at 12%. 39% of your dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-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.

72%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$23M · 30 repeat orgs$8.7M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +85% since the first grant, against -17% for the ones you funded once.

30 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 29 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$23M

$8.7M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+85%

-17%

Still filing today

53%

18%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

RenewedFirst-time

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

EnvironmentEmploymentEducationOther

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

SC
Shasta County
3× · 2018–2022 · $1.4M · revenue +85%
FR
Feather River Land Trust
6× · 2018–2023 · $1.2M · revenue +332%
SL
Shasta Land Trust
6× · 2018–2023 · $850k · revenue +857% · 27% of their budget

Funded once

PT
PLACER TITLE COMPANY
one grant, 2020 · $5.0M
SJ
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION
one grant, 2021 · $2.4M · revenue -17%
PC
PLACER COUNTY ASSESSOR
one grant, 2022 · $612k

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.

Sutter Buttes Regional Land Trust

Establish conservation easements in Yuba, Sutter, and Colusa counties. Work with 3 county landowners and governmental agencies to protect the Sutter Buttes and surrounding region.

—

Santa Clara River Conservancy

The Santa Clara River Conservancy represents the diverse interests of the Santa Clara River, from the flood plain to the highest tributaries, and seeks to secure, sustain, and manage significant lands and waters that provide habitat for…

Environment

Nature Trust of the Santa Monica Mountai

Environment

Tahoe Rim Trail Association

To maintain and enhance the tahoe rim trail system, practice and inspire stewardship, and preserve recreational access to the natural beauty of the lake tahoe region.

Recreation & Sports

Siskiyou Land Conservancy

The Siskiyou Land Conservancy is a state and federally approved non-profit organization that assists landowners who want to protect the natural values of their land, either through purchase or establishment of conservation easements.

Environment

Solano Land Trust

The mission of solano land trust is to protect land to ensure a healthy environment, keep ranching and farming families on their properties, and inspire a love of the land.

Food & Nutrition

Friends of the Lost Coast

Environment

Sierra Watch

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

Environment

Oregon Agricultural Trust

Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.

Environment

Golden State Land Conservancy Inc

Promote conservation easements and resource management plans that conserve agriculture lands, forestlands, wildlife habitat, open space, and other natural resources, in perpetuity.

Environment

Redwood Coast Land Conservancy

We conserve lands for recreational, educational, ecological, agricultural, scenic and open space opportunities. We also develop and maintain public access ways and trails to the ocean, rivers and other natural or scenic features along…

Environment

Sonoma Mountain Institute

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northern California Regional Land Trust and the most unlike its peers is Spring Rivers Foundation. 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

18 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)

Early backer (in before they grew)

18/18

Grantees still filing

14/18

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$22,172,437Environment$5,229,304Education$2,410,050Employment$1,431,095

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.

Land Trust Alliance IncDC20.1× affinity7 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Land Trust Alliance Inc · California Council of Land Trusts · The Trust for Public Land · Resources Legacy Fund · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Network for Good · 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 organisation PACIFIC FOREST & WATERSHED LANDS 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.

2025

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

0get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–25

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: SPRING RIVERS FOUNDATION.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

low risk

5 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 201778247 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 SPRING RIVERS FOUNDATION, 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

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 84% 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 Pacific Forest & Watershed Lands?

Find your warmest path to Pacific Forest & Watershed Lands 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.

PACIFIC FOREST & WATERSHED LANDS

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

18 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Pacific Forest & Watershed Lands?

More from the funding graph

PACIFIC FOREST & WATERSHED LANDS

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

18 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Pacific Forest & Watershed Lands?

More from the funding graph