Skip to content
Resilient Cities Catalyst Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Resilient Cities Catalyst Inc

Help cities and communities create catalytic change to solve their most pressing challenges.

$463k
Granted FY2024still arriving
11
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Environment$1.4MFood & Nutrition$97kCommunity Improvement$95kRecreation & Sports$43kEducation$35kHuman Services$15kHousing & Shelter$8k
02FY2024 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 11 grants below total $362,244, the rows itemized in this filing. The $462,627 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $100,383 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $250k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $100k
$41,777
Median grant
6
States reached
$6.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PITKIN AVENUE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT$50,000
WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY$50,000
TREE PITTSBURGH$47,000
CITY OF AUSTIN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT$43,000
FOODWORKS GROUP$42,500
VALLEY VISION INC$41,777
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER JOHNSTOWN$35,000
UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO$25,000
UNLIMITED POTENTIAL$15,460
JCDECAUX STREET FURNITURE NEW YORK$7,500
HATCHER URBAN BUSINESS$5,007
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 (FY22–22, $47k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%NORTHEAST HOUSTON REDEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $47k → 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: $85k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

North America (Canada and Mexico)$47k · 56% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: BLACK CREEK COMMUNITY FARM EVENT AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

East Asia and the Pacific$25k · 29% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT

South Asia$13k · 15% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT

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 18% of Resilient Cities Catalyst Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Resilient Cities Catalyst Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 5.1% 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.

55%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$900k · 5 repeat orgs$745k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
7

Total granted

$900k
$489k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+58%
+126%

Still filing today

100%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 22% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $255k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitHealthScience & TechOther
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

  • FO
    FRIENDS OF THE PITTSBURGH URBAN FOREST
    2× · 2023–2024 · $286k · revenue +88%
  • CR
    CLIMATE RESOLVE
    3× · 2021–2023 · $144k · revenue +74%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO
    5× · 2020–2024 · $115k · revenue +42%

Funded once

  • KE
    KINNETIC ENVIRONMENTAL INC
    one grant, 2023 · $170k
  • SL
    SCAPE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
    one grant, 2023 · $100k
  • DU
    DELTARES USA INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue +41%
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
The Urban Land Institute

Shape the future of the built environment for transformative impact in communities worldwide. we are a global network of professionals in every sector of real estate development and land use, from private enterprise to public service.

Environment
2
Third Way

To research and develop centrist policy ideas.

Civil Rights
3
Rescape California

ReScape addresses climate change by providing a regenerative, nature-based whole systems foundation for landscaping education, workforce development and policy.Foundational to our work is a whole systems watershed framework that…

Environment
4
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
5
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
6
Ceres Inc

Ceres is a nonprofit advocacy organization working to accelerate the transition to a cleaner, more just, and resilient world. through education and research, we make the business case for action on the most pressing sustainability…

Environment
7
Watttime Corporation

To raise awareness about the potential to reduce environmental harm by shifting electricity use to particular times; to encourage the development and spread of common protocols for this practice.

Science & Tech
8
Ag Innovations Network

Ag Innovations facilitates collaboration among diverse groups to develop holistic solutions to California's most complex agricultural, natural resource and environmental challenges.

Food & Nutrition
9
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
10
The United States Business Council Sustainable Development

Promotion of sustainable development in the united states.

Community Improvement
11
Environment Now
—
12
Sustainable Growers
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Climate Resolve; the most unlike its peers is Deltares Usa 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

14 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. 14 of the 21 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
10/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

KINNETIC ENVIRONMENTAL INC: $169,801 · OtherKINNETIC ENVIRONMENTAL INCUNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO: $115,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGOSCAPE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE: $100,000 · OtherSCAPE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTUREPRAIRIE VIEW A&M UNIVERSITY: $55,182 · OtherPRAIRIE VIEW A&M UNIVERSITYPITKIN AVENUE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT: $50,000 · OtherPITKIN AVENUE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTR…City of Austin: $43,000 · OtherCity of AustinFOODWORKS GROUP: $42,500 · OtherFOODWORKS GROUP+3 more: $25,000 · OtherFRIENDS OF THE PITTSBURGH URBAN FOREST: $285,800 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE PITTSBURGH URBAN FO…CLIMATE RESOLVE: $144,009 · EnvironmentCLIMATE RESOLVEWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY: $50,000 · EnvironmentWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCYTREEPEOPLE INC: $25,000 · EnvironmentCivicwell: $330,000 · Public BenefitCivicwellDELTARES USA INC: $100,000 · Science & TechNortheast Houston Redevelopment Council: $47,000 · Human ServicesUNLIMITED POTENTIAL INC: $15,460 · Human ServicesVALLEY VISION: $41,777 · Community ImprovementThe Hatcher Urban Businesses: $5,007 · Community ImprovementCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER JOHNSTOWN: $35,000 · Philanthropy
Other$600,483Environment$504,809Public Benefit$330,000Science & Tech$100,000Human Services$62,460Community Improvement$46,784Philanthropy$35,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCivicwell: $330,000 over 2y, 4.2% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE PITTSBURGH URBAN FOREST: $285,800 over 2y, 10.0% of budgetCLIMATE RESOLVE: $144,009 over 3y, 4.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO: $115,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetDELTARES USA INC: $100,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNortheast Houston Redevelopment Council: $47,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetVALLEY VISION: $41,777 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF GREATER JOHNSTOWN: $35,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTREEPEOPLE INC: $25,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetUNLIMITED POTENTIAL INC: $15,460 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetResilience Education Training and Innovation Center Limited: $10,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetWALKSACRAMENTO INC dba CIVIC THREAD: $7,500 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetThe Hatcher Urban Businesses: $5,007 over 1y, 12% 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.

The California Endowm…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The California EndowmentCA12.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The California Endowment · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Resilient Cities Catalyst Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Resilient Cities Catalyst Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 23%
  • Deltares Usa Inc: 23% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Resilient Cities Catalyst Inc?

Find your warmest path to Resilient Cities Catalyst Inc 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 21 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Resilient Cities Catalyst’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