Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Private foundation

Patagoniaorg

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$13M
Granted FY2025still arriving
425
Grants FY2025still arriving
46
States reached
$5.2M
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 FY2017–2025.

Environment$66MPhilanthropy$26MInternational$6.5MFood & Nutrition$6.4MAnimals$2.7MCivil Rights$2.3MCommunity Improvement$2.0MArts & Culture$1.5MOther$0
02FY2025 · 425 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k401 grants · $6.1M
  • $50k–250k21 grants · $1.3M
  • $250k+2 grants · $5.8M
$15,000
Median grant
46
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA$5,174,555
MAKEWAY FOUNDATION$635,000
THE CONSERVATION ALLIANCE$110,000
AMERICARES$100,000
WISTEQN'EEMIT$100,000
EARTH ISLAND INSTITUTE$80,000
RESOURCES LEGACY FUND$75,000
COLORADO PLATEAU FOUNDATION$65,000
SAVE OUR WILD SALMON COALITION$50,000
CLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANCE$50,000
NEXTGEN CLIMATE AMERICA INC DBA NEXTGEN POLICY$50,000
SPONSOR INC$50,000
UNITED TRIBES OF BRISTOL BAY$50,000
SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER$50,000
VOTE SOLAR$50,000
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 (FY17–25, $964k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 74% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%SOUTHEASTERN MASSACHUSETTS AGRICULTURAL PARTNERSHIP INC: $20k → 11%WOMEN IN RANCHING INC: $60k → 15%KEE CHA-E-NAR CORPORATION: $30k → 17%TIDES CENTER: $25k → 9%MULTICULTURAL REFUGEE COALITION DBA THE REFUGEE COLLECTIVE: $15k → 10%EKVNV YEFOLECVLKE: $20k → 18%ADELANTE MUJERES: $15k → 8%PROJECT WORTHMORE: $15k → 8%WOMEN IN RANCHING INC: $30k → 15%CERES COMMUNITY PROJECT: $20k → 9%GREEN CITY FORCE INC: $15k → 20%EKVNV YEFOLECVLKE: $15k → 18%PROJECT WORTHMORE: $15k → 8%CENTER FOR RURAL STRATEGIES INC: $22k → 29%EKVNV YEFOLECVLKE: $15k → 18%ABUNDANT GRACE COASTSIDE WORKER: $15k → 7%OUTSIDE LAS VEGAS FOUNDATION: $20k → 13%ATABEY OUTDOORS: $15k → 11%GREAT OLD BROADS FOR WILDERNESS: $16k → 12%HISPANIC ACCESS FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%HISPANIC ACCESS FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%HISPANIC ACCESS FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%LATINO COMMUNITY FUND OF WASHINGTON STATE: $50k → 9%HISPANIC ACCESS FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%TIDES CENTER: $30k → 10%LATINO COMMUNITY FUND OF WASHINGTON STATE: $70k → 9%Tides Center: $21k → 10%TIDES CENTER: $15k → 10%TIDES CENTER: $15k → 10%LATINO COMMUNITY FUND OF WASHINGTON STATE: $25k → 9%TIDES CENTER: $140k → 14%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

AK
ME
VT
NH
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
MD
DE
AZ
NM
AR
TN
NC
SC
DC
HI
LA
MS
AL
GA
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.

04

Where the work is directed

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

About 22% of Patagoniaorg’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.

Patagoniaorglessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 2.1% directed abroad (not shown)

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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$79M · 1052 repeat orgs$12M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +62% since the first grant, against +42% for the ones you funded once.

1052 repeat relationships — 345 still active in FY2025, 707 since wound down; 73 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

1052
846

Total granted

$79M
$10M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+62%
+42%

Still filing today

88%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.3M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentFood & NutritionAnimalsEducationRecreation & SportsCommunity ImprovementOther

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

  • CL
    Conservation Lands Foundation
    6× · 2017–2022 · $1.7M · revenue +31%
  • RL
    RESOURCES LEGACY FUND
    8× · 2017–2025 · $850k · revenue +63%
  • Earth Island Institute Inc
    8× · 2017–2025 · $798k · revenue +271%

Funded once

  • MF
    MAKEWAY FOUNDATION FKA TIDES CANADA FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $250k
  • NV
    NEW VENTURE FUNDCOLLECTIVE ACTION FUND
    one grant, 2022 · $165k
  • NA
    NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $105k · revenue +86%

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
Sustainable Conservation

Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…

Environment
2
Boulder Watershed Collective

The Boulder Watershed Collective is a 501c3 non-profit stakeholder-driven organization established to address forested watershed health,resiliency and stewardship. We have three program areas: ClimateAdaptation and Resilience Watershed…

Environment
3
Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council

The Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council is a local nonprofit organization that strives to enhance and restore habitat for fish and wildlife our community and for future generations. Our Board of Directors consists of seven members with…

Environment
4
Western Rivers Conservancy

Western rivers conservancy's mission is to protect outstanding river ecosystems in the western united states. continued on schedule o.we acquire land to conserve critical habitat, provide public access for compatible use and enjoyment, and…

Environment
5
Land Conservancy of West Michigan

Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…

Environment
6
Bitterroot Water Partnership

BWP leads reliable and intentional conservation initiatives that promote and provide clean, ample water for people and habitats by working with key partners and our communities

Environment
7
Taproot Earth

Taproot Earth works with communities to support strategies around the use of water, energy and land.

Environment
8
Environment Now
—
9
Global Forest Generation

Global Forest Generation restores and protects forest ecosystems in partnership with grassroots leaders and local communities across vast landscapes which play a critical role in preserving water, protecting biodiversity, storing carbon,…

Environment
10
Rainforest Trust

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

International
11
Water Climate Trust

Water Climate Trust works to restore aquatic ecosystems with people who depend on them for food, jobs, health, recreation, and cultural survival. To this end, we advance water allocation policies that protect instream flows for ecosystem,…

Environment
12
Cascade Climate Inc

To accelerate progress in interventions that harness Earths natural systems to stabilize the climate.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc and the most unlike its peers is Holistic Manangement International. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyEnvironmental Conservation …Local Food System Organizat…Immigrant Worker SupportYouth Development ServicesAffordable Housing Developm…Women & Girls Leadership De…Youth Sports ProgramsAffordable Housing Construc…United Way AffiliatesFood Banks and PantriesHealth Access Advocacy and …Christian Missionary Organi…Community FoundationsCommunity College Foundatio…Faith-Based Liberal Arts Co…Community Arts CentersCommunity FoundationsPolicy Research and Advocacy
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 25 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%3%<5yr14%9%5–10yr19%27%10–20yr16%35%20–35yr13%19%35–55yr16%7%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%2%<5yr14%6%5–10yr19%20%10–20yr16%39%20–35yr13%29%35–55yr16%5%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
1%20/1,732
the rest of the field
13%
240,376/1,817,833

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

05the grantee network

1653 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. 1653 of the 1,994 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.

36
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
765
Early backer (in before they grew)
1603/1653
Grantees still filing
1233/1653
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Conservation Lands Foundation — $1,700,000 · EnvironmentConservation Lands FoundationRESOURCES LEGACY FUND — $850,000 · EnvironmentEarth Island Institute Inc — $797,572 · EnvironmentNEW VENTURE FUND — $712,500 · EnvironmentALASKA WILDERNESS LEAGUE — $687,000 · Environment+90 more — $15,493,560 · Environment+90 moreTIDES FOUNDATION — $13,540,233 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUNDATIONCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA — $5,174,555 · PhilanthropyCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMER…+6 more — $1,345,000 · Philanthropy+6 moreCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION (CAF) AMERICA — $7,925,000 · OtherCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION (CAF)…MAKEWAY FOUNDATION — $1,921,000 · OtherMAKEWAY FOUNDATION+66 more — $10,979,000 · Other+66 moreNETWORK FOR GOOD — $10,091,758 · Public Safety & DisasterNETWORK FOR GO…SAVE OUR WILD SALMON — $415,000 · AnimalsWILD FISH CONSERVANCY — $311,500 · AnimalsRESOLVE INC — $300,000 · AnimalsWILD SALMON CENTER — $255,000 · AnimalsCENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC — $216,850 · AnimalsTHEODORE ROOSEVELT CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP INC — $135,000 · AnimalsNative Fish Society Inc — $122,000 · AnimalsWYOMING WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION — $111,500 · AnimalsWASHINGTON WILD — $104,000 · AnimalsTROUT UNLIMITED INC — $101,000 · AnimalsCOLORADO PLATEAU FOUNDATION — $350,000 · EducationTHE OUTDOOR FOUNDATION — $302,500 · EducationSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC — $270,000 · EducationINDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK — $225,000 · EducationSustainable Economies Law Center — $220,000 · EducationUpper Missouri Waterkeeper Inc — $150,000 · EducationGREENWAVE ORGANIZATION CORP — $127,000 · EducationRogue Climate — $127,000 · EducationVERMILION SEA INSTITUTE — $115,000 · EducationAMERICARES FOUNDATION INC — $600,000 · InternationalGLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN INC — $225,000 · InternationalAlliance for Global Justice Corp — $144,500 · InternationalGirl Rising — $125,000 · InternationalRURAL ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION INTERNATION — $121,000 · InternationalCENTRAL ASIA INSTITUTE — $100,000 · InternationalCAMFED USA FOUNDATION — $100,000 · InternationalTHOUSAND CURRENTS — $100,000 · InternationalINSTITUTE FOR GOVERNANCE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT — $100,000 · International
Environment$20,240,632Philanthropy$20,059,788Other$20,825,000Public Safety & Disaster$10,091,758Animals$2,071,850Education$1,886,500International$1,615,500

Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTIDES FOUNDATION — $13,540,233 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetNETWORK FOR GOOD — $10,091,758 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA — $5,174,555 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetConservation Lands Foundation — $1,700,000 over 6y, 7.2% of budgetRESOURCES LEGACY FUND — $850,000 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetEarth Island Institute Inc — $797,572 over 8y, 1.2% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND — $712,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetALASKA WILDERNESS LEAGUE — $687,000 over 8y, 5.0% of budgetNATIONAL TROPICAL BOTANICAL GARDEN — $640,000 over 7y, 1.3% of budgetAMERICARES FOUNDATION INC — $600,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CONSERVATION ALLIANCE — $540,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION — $479,806 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetRodale Institute — $445,000 over 7y, 1.4% of budgetSAVE OUR WILD SALMON — $415,000 over 8y, 25% of budgetTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY — $388,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE — $385,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetCARBON CYCLE INSTITUTE — $383,500 over 8y, 14% of budget1 FOR THE PLANET INC — $380,000 over 8y, 8.1% of budgetOutdoor Alliance — $375,000 over 6y, 8.6% of budgetSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC — $350,123 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetCOLORADO PLATEAU FOUNDATION — $350,000 over 4y, 6.0% of budgetWILD FISH CONSERVANCY — $311,500 over 6y, 4.9% of budgetTHE OUTDOOR FOUNDATION — $302,500 over 3y, 7.0% of budgetMeridian Institute — $300,000 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetRESOLVE INC — $300,000 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetEnvironmental Health Coalition — $275,640 over 8y, 2.4% of budgetTIDES CENTER — $275,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetRIVER NETWORK — $270,000 over 8y, 1.9% of budgetSTATE INNOVATION EXCHANGE — $270,000 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC — $270,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION — $268,138 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetWASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION EDUCATION FUND — $265,000 over 7y, 1.9% of budgetAGRARIAN LAND TRUST — $260,000 over 3y, 8.3% of budgetPesticide Action Network North America — $255,800 over 8y, 1.4% of budgetWILD SALMON CENTER — $255,000 over 4y, 2.2% of budgetCONSERVATION NW — $251,500 over 8y, 1.7% of budgetCENTER FOR CLIMATE INTEGRITY — $250,000 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetNORTHEASTERN MINNESOTANS FOR WILDERNESS — $246,500 over 8y, 2.4% of budgetCOMMUNITIES FOR A BETTER ENVIRONMENT — $245,000 over 7y, 1.8% of budgetOREGON NATURAL DESERT ASSOCIATION — $239,500 over 8y, 5.1% of budgetAmerican Whitewater — $235,065 over 7y, 2.4% of budgetWYOMING OUTDOOR COUNCIL — $227,500 over 9y, 2.9% of budgetINDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK — $225,000 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetGLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN INC — $225,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC — $225,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetSustainable Economies Law Center — $220,000 over 7y, 0.9% of budgetCENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC — $216,850 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetTRUSTEES FOR ALASKA — $216,500 over 8y, 2.4% 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.

  • Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds NETWORK FOR GOOD ↗
  • Who funds CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds Conservation Lands Foundation ↗
  • Who funds RESOURCES LEGACY FUND ↗
  • Who funds Earth Island Institute Inc ↗
  • Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
  • Who funds ALASKA WILDERNESS LEAGUE ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL TROPICAL BOTANICAL GARDEN ↗
  • Who funds AMERICARES FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds THE CONSERVATION ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Rodale Institute ↗
  • Who funds SAVE OUR WILD SALMON ↗
  • Who funds THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
  • Who funds CARBON CYCLE INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds 1 FOR THE PLANET INC ↗
  • Who funds Outdoor Alliance ↗
  • Who funds SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC ↗
  • Who funds COLORADO PLATEAU FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds WILD FISH CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds THE OUTDOOR FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Meridian Institute ↗
  • Who funds RESOLVE INC ↗
  • Who funds Environmental Health Coalition ↗
  • Who funds TIDES CENTER ↗
  • Who funds RIVER NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds STATE INNOVATION EXCHANGE ↗
  • Who funds SOCIAL GOOD FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds THE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION EDUCATION FUND ↗
  • Who funds AGRARIAN LAND TRUST ↗
  • Who funds Pesticide Action Network North America ↗
  • Who funds WILD SALMON CENTER ↗

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.

Clif Family FoundationResources Legacy FundMaki FoundationThe Wilderness SocietyThe New-Land Foundati…Wilburforce FoundationThe Rose Foundation f…Western Conservation …The Schmidt Family Fo…Sierra ClubTortuga Charitable Fo…Natural Resources Def…
Clif Family FoundationCA125× affinity236 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Clif Family Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · Maki Foundation · The Wilderness Society · The New-Land Foundation Inc · Wilburforce Foundation · The Rose Foundation for Communities the Environment · Western Conservation Foundation · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Sierra Club · Tortuga Charitable Foundation · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc

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 Patagoniaorg 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
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 70%5%19%42%75%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 9%
  • Wild Salmon Center — 49% of income from government
  • Native Fish Society Inc — 27% of income from government
  • Biscayne Bay Waterkeeper Inc — 19% of income from government
  • Intervale Center Inc — 13% of income from government
  • Oregon Natural Desert Association — 9% of income from government
  • Rogue Climate — 7% of income from government
  • American Whitewater — 5% of income from government
  • Columbia Riverkeeper — 1% of income from government
  • Americares Foundation Inc — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
7get no government money at all
48report 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

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 Patagoniaorg?

Find your warmest path to Patagoniaorg 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 1994 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines