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

· Public charity

Rare

RARE inspires change so people and nature thrive.

$1.9M
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$130k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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$1.2MArts & Culture$199kAnimals$137kFood & Nutrition$136kInternational$105kEducation$34k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $275,382, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,942,762 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,667,380 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $26k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $243k
$15,570
Median grant
3
States reached
$40M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WILDAID INC$130,000
ACTION FOR BOSTON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INC$112,657
STANFORD UNIVERSITY$15,570
ONE EARTH CONSERVATION$10,000
NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY RESEARCH$7,155
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 (FY25–25, $113k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, 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%ACTION FOR BOSTON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INC: $113k → 16%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.

Grants abroad, by region: $1.5M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 5 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$921k · 63% · 29 grants

Stated purpose: SEED FUNDING FOR MICROENTERPISES. · EMPOWERMENT OF FISHER-FARMER COMMUNITIES TO ADOPT NATURE-BASED CONSERVATION SOLUTIONS.

Central America and the Caribbean$257k · 17% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: EMPOWERING COASTAL FISHER FARMING COMMUNITIES TO PROTECT BIODIVERSITY AND BUILD PROSPERITY; SCALING OF COMMUNITY-BASED FISHERIES MANAGEMENT.

East Asia and the Pacific$163k · 11% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: EMPOWERING COASTAL FISHER FARMING COMMUNITIES TO PROTECT BIODIVERSITY AND BUILD PROSPERITY; SCALING OF COMMUNITY-BASED FISHERIES MANAGEMENT. · CLIMATE REEF PROTECTION. · BUILDING FINANCIAL RESILIENCY FOR COASTAL FISHERS.

South America$123k · 8% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: CREATION AND STRUCTURE OF MARINE RESERVES, SUPPORT FOR THE FORMATION OF MANAGEMENT COUNCILS AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF MANAGEMENT PLANS TO IMPLEMENT PUBLIC POLICY. · CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN PROTECTED COASTAL AND MARINE AREAS, WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES AND TRADITIONAL POPULATIONS. · IMPLEMENTING METHODS FOR SUSTAINABLE TRADE.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$8k · 1% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: RESEARCH ON CONSERVATION AND BEHAVIOR CHANGE.

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 9% of Rare’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 17% of the giving stays in VA; by stated purpose, 3%.

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

62%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 8 repeat orgs$682k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
8

Total granted

$1.1M
$559k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+33%
+52%

Still filing today

88%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $123k 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
EnvironmentInternationalAnimalsArts & CultureHuman ServicesEducationOther
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

  • WI
    WILDAID INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $370k · revenue +2%
  • ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED
    2× · 2017–2018 · $200k · revenue +202%
  • SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
    2× · 2018–2019 · $199k · revenue +30%

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%
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
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
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
4
Earth & Space Research

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

Science & Tech
5
Ocean Conservancy

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

Environment
6
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
7
Amazon Conservation Team

The amazon conservation team (act) partners with indigenous and other local communities to protect tropical forests and strengthen traditional culture.

Science & Tech
8
National Audubon Society Inc

We work towards a future where birds thrive across the americas because audubon is a powerful, diverse, and ever-growing force for conservation. (continued on schedule o).

Environment
9
Rare

Rare inspires change so people and nature thrive.

Environment
10
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
11
Akashinga Inc

Deliver ecological stability and long-term protection of large-scale wilderness by supporting and empowering local communities.

Animals
12
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.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated; 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

16 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. 16 of the 20 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

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

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
15/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WILDAID INC: $370,000 · AnimalsWILDAID INCWildlife Conservation Society: $136,788 · AnimalsWildlife Conservation Socie…THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $233,962 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA BARBARA: $225,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SA…BLUE SOURCE LLC: $21,750 · Other+2 more: $17,600 · OtherENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $200,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FU…INT'L UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE & NATURAL RESOURCES - US: $161,628 · EnvironmentINT'L UNION FOR CONSERVA…SECORE INTERNATIONAL INC: $50,295 · EnvironmentSECORE INTERNATIONAL INCCool Effect Inc: $15,680 · Environment+1 more: $10,000 · EnvironmentPRECISION DEVELOPMENT INC: $136,133 · InternationalPRECISION DEV…ACCION INTERNATIONAL: $80,000 · InternationalACCION INTERN…SOLAR SISTER INC: $25,000 · InternationalSOLAR SISTER …SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: $198,812 · Arts & CultureSMITHSONIA…ACTION FOR BOSTON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INC: $112,657 · Human ServicesNORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY: $41,411 · EducationTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $15,570 · EducationSUSTAINABLE ORGANIC INTEGRATED LIVELIHOODS C/O MELANIE STEVENSON: $5,000 · Food & Nutrition
Animals$506,788Other$498,312Environment$437,603International$241,133Arts & Culture$198,812Human Services$112,657Education$56,981Food & Nutrition$5,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWILDAID INC: $370,000 over 3y, 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: $41,411 over 2y, 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
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.

Silicon Valley Commun…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
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

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • Northeastern University: 7% 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, 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 20 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Rare’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