· Private foundation
Rahr Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k16 grants · $105k
- $10k–50k12 grants · $160k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| EARTH JUSTICE | $20,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND | $20,000 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVATORY | $20,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $15,000 |
| MONTANA TROUT UNLIMITED | $15,000 |
| SUSTAINABLE NORTHWEST | $10,000 |
| U OF M FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| WILD SALMON CENTER | $10,000 |
| CHIRICAHUA LAND CONSERVANCY | $10,000 |
| MN LAND TRUST | $10,000 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVANCY | $10,000 |
| AMERICAN RIVERA | $10,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF WINDSOR | $7,500 |
| FAIRFIELD UNIVERSITY | $7,500 |
| CONCORDIA COLLEGE | $7,500 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 80% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +73% since the first grant, against +9% for the ones you funded once.
33 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2024, 22 since wound down; 16 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 42% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $153k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- MTMONTANA TROUT UNLIMITED5× · 2020–2024 · $113k · revenue +196%
- MSMINNEAPOLIS SOCIETY OF FINE ARTS DBA MINNEAPOLIS INSTITUTE OF ARTS3× · 2020–2022 · $80k · revenue +73%
EARTHJUSTICE4× · 2021–2024 · $65k · revenue +49%
Funded once
- UOUNIVERSITY OF NORTH DAKOTAone grant, 2020 · $15k
- MAMARIN AGRICULTURAL LAND TRUSTone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +9%
- DODefenders of Wildlifegraduatedone grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue +41%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
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.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
Wwt's mission is to protect and restore water in rivers and streams across washington state. washington water trust restores and protects water in rivers and streams and promotes sustainable freshwater management in washington, and, more…
Icl's mission is to create a conservation community and pragmatic, enduring solutions that protect and restore the air you breathe, the water you drink, and the land and wildlife you love.
Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.
Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…
Maintain the swan valley's unique natural resources and ensure that a vibrant human community can sustain itself through stewardship, education, economic viability, and conservation on public and private lands.
The minnesota environmental partnership is a coalition that strengthens member effectiveness and builds collective power to secure a healthy environment for all minnesotans.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.
The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wild Salmon Center and the most unlike its peers is Owl Research Institute Inc. 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.
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 51 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
29 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. 29 of the 69 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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.
- Who funds MONTANA TROUT UNLIMITED ↗
- Who funds MINNEAPOLIS SOCIETY OF FINE ARTS DBA MINNEAPOLIS INSTITUTE OF ARTS ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds MINNESOTA LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds SUSTAINABLE NORTHWEST ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WILDLIFE REHABILITATION CENTER OF MINNESOTA ↗
- Who funds CHIRICAHUA LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds THE MONTANA LAND RELIANCE ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds Children's Theatre Company and School ↗
- Who funds Fairfield University ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE GENERATION ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds Montana Environmental Information Center ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds GREATER TWIN CITIES YOUTH SYMPHONIES ↗
- Who funds University of St Thomas ↗
- Who funds WILD SALMON CENTER ↗
- Who funds MARIN AGRICULTURAL LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds Defenders of Wildlife ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Xcel Energy Foundation · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation · The Crosswols Foundation · The K Foundation · Margaret a Cargill Foundation · The McKnight Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Ch Robinson Worldwide Foundation · The Minneapolis Foundation · Ibm International 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 Rahr 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.
- Wild Salmon Center — 49% of income from government
- Sustainable Northwest — 5% of income from government
- Fairfield University — 1% of income from government
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.