Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Rare

RARE inspires change so people and nature thrive.

$1.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$203k
Largest
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 FY20172024.

Environment$1.2MArts & Culture$199kAnimals$137kFood & Nutrition$136kInternational$105kEducation$34k
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 4 grants below total $368,628 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,508,949 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $1,140,321 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $34k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $334k
$80,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$35M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WILDAID INC$202,500
ACCION INTERNATIONAL$80,000
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$51,872
NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY RESEARCH ACCOUNTING$34,256
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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 81% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY RESEARCH ACCOUNTING: $34k → 16%COOL EFFECT INC: $8k → 8%WILDAID INC: $203k → 10%The Regents of the University of California: $125k → 14%SUSTAINABLE ORGANIC INTEGRATED LIVELIHOODS (SOIL): $5k → 12%EVERLAND LLC: $10k → 17%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $137k → 28%INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES: $162k → 14%BLUE SOURCE LLC: $22k → 8%SECORE INTERNATIONAL INC: $29k → 15%SOLAR SISTER INC: $13k → 6%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $96k → 7%PRECISION AGRICULTURE FOR DEVELOPMENT: $136k → 16%COOL EFFECT INC: $7k → 8%WILDAID INC: $38k → 10%THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: $100k → 14%EVERLAND LLC: $8k → 17%ACCION INTERNATIONAL: $80k → 14%SECORE INTERNATIONAL INC: $21k → 15%SOLAR SISTER INC: $13k → 6%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $86k → 7%Environmental Defense Fund: $100k → 17%SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: $162k → 14%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $52k → 7%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $100k → 17%SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: $37k → 7%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.

Grants abroad, by region — $963k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 4 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$587k · 61% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: COASTAL LIFELINE - A PROVINCIAL APPROACH TO THE EMPOWERMENT OF FISHER-FARMER COMMUNITIES TO ADOPT NATURE-BASED SOLUTIONS IN MOZAMBIQUE.

East Asia and the Pacific$258k · 27% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: BEHAVIOR CAMPAIGNS ALL ROUNDS - COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PHASES 1 AND 2. · SUPPORT THE CONDUCT OF THE BASELINE ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTS, GENETICS, AND EDNA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS IN SELECTED RARE SITES IN EASTERN SAMAR AND SOUTHERN LEYTE, AND ALSO SUPPORT CAPACITY-BUILDING AND LEARNING EXCHANGE ACROSS VARIOUS FACETS OF THE PROJECT. · SUPPORT THE SUBGRANTEE'S ROLE AS LEAD CONVENOR AND ARCHITECT OF THE FIRST PHASE OF THE PROJECT "UNLOCKING BLUE PACIFIC PROSPERITY: NAVIGATING THE VOYAGE FROM CONCEPT TO DESIGN".

Central America and the Caribbean$93k · 10% · 5 grants

Stated purpose: SOLUTION SEARCH: JUDGES' CHOICE WINNER. · SCALING OF COMMUNITY-BASED FISHERIES MANAGEMENT IN HONDURAS THROUGH FISH FOREVER. · HONDURAS SEAGRASS AND MANGROVE RESTORATION DIAGNOSIS.

South America$26k · 3% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: SUPPORT THE CONDUCT OF MEETINGS/ASSEMBLIES TO INCREASINGLY STRENGTHEN THE MARINE AND COASTAL EXTRACTIVE RESERVES OF PARA, BRAZIL. · STRENGTHENING EXTRACTIVE RESERVES AND TRADITIONAL COASTAL AND MARINE EXTRACTIVE PEOPLES (CONFREM BRASIL), INTENDED TO COVER EXPENSES IN STRENGTHENING ACTIVITIES IN MARANHAO. · SOLUTION SEARCH: PEOPLE'S CHOICE WINNER.

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. 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 earmarks the money.

About 9% of Rare’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. Read by recipient address, 17% of the giving stays in VA; read by stated purpose it is 3% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Rarelessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 23% 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.

62%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$955k · 7 repeat orgs$593k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
7

Total granted

$955k
$479k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+37%
+121%

Still filing today

86%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 64% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $114k 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
EnvironmentInternationalAnimalsArts & CultureEducationFood & NutritionOther

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

  • WI
    WILDAID INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $240k · revenue +2%
  • ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED
    2× · 2017–2018 · $200k · revenue +202%
  • SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
    2× · 2018–2019 · $199k · revenue +33%

Funded once

  • IU
    INT'L UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE & NATURAL RESOURCES - USgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $162k · revenue +299%
  • WC
    Wildlife Conservation Societygraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $137k · revenue +52%
  • PD
    PRECISION DEVELOPMENT INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $136k · revenue +121%

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
Conservation International Foundation

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

Environment
2
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
3
International Council On Environmental Economics and Development Union
Human Services
4
Natural Resources Defense Council Inc

We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…

Environment
5
Rainforest Foundation Inc

The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.

Environment
6
Earth & Space Research

Increase societal understanding of the earth system through scientific research and education.

Science & Tech
7
Ocean Conservancy

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

Environment
8
Rainforest Alliance Inc

RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.

9
Endangered Species International

Endangered Species International is strongly committed to reversing the trend of human-induced species extinction, saving endangered animals, and preserving wild places.

Animals
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
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
12
Environment Now

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wildaid Inc and the most unlike its peers is Solar Sister Inc. 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

13 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 13 of the 17 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
12/13
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

THE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $233,962 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA BARBARA — $225,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA …BLUE SOURCE LLC — $21,750 · Other+2 more — $17,600 · OtherENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED — $200,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND …INT'L UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE & NATURAL RESOURCES - US — $161,628 · EnvironmentINT'L UNION FOR CONSERVATIO…SECORE INTERNATIONAL INC — $50,295 · EnvironmentSECORE INTERNATIONAL INCCool Effect Inc — $15,680 · EnvironmentWILDAID INC — $240,000 · AnimalsWILDAID INCWildlife Conservation Society — $136,788 · AnimalsWildlife Conservation S…PRECISION DEVELOPMENT INC — $136,133 · InternationalPRECISION DEVEL…ACCION INTERNATIONAL — $80,000 · InternationalACCION INTERNAT…SOLAR SISTER INC — $25,000 · InternationalSOLAR SISTER IN…SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION — $198,812 · Arts & CultureSMITHSONIAN …NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY — $34,256 · EducationSUSTAINABLE ORGANIC INTEGRATED LIVELIHOODS C/O MELANIE STEVENSON — $5,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$498,312Environment$427,603Animals$376,788International$241,133Arts & Culture$198,812Education$34,256Food & Nutrition$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetWILDAID INC — $240,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $233,962 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED — $200,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION — $198,812 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetINT'L UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE & NATURAL RESOURCES - US — $161,628 over 1y, 21% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society — $136,788 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPRECISION DEVELOPMENT INC — $136,133 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetACCION INTERNATIONAL — $80,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSECORE INTERNATIONAL INC — $50,295 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetNORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY — $34,256 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOLAR SISTER INC — $25,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetCool Effect Inc — $15,680 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSUSTAINABLE ORGANIC INTEGRATED LIVELIHOODS C/O MELANIE STEVENSON — $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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.

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.

Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA11.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 organization Rare 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
202122232425
no gov · 10%2%6%14%25%your share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 7%
  • Northeastern University7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
typical government reliance, FY2025

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.

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 17 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph