Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Public charity

Rewild

Re:wild protects and restores the wild to build a thriving earth where all life flourishes.

$64M
Granted FY2025still arriving
43
Grants FY2025still arriving
20
States reached
$425k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
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$5.8MScience & Tech$2.9MPhilanthropy$2.6MAnimals$1.9MCommunity Improvement$750kEducation$125kFood & Nutrition$75kArts & Culture$50kOther$0
02FY2025 · 43 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 43 grants below total $3,815,997 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $63,558,340 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $59,742,343 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 · FY2025

  • $10k–50k18 grants · $423k
  • $50k–250k22 grants · $2.4M
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.0M
$60,000
Median grant
20
States reached
$74M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GROUNDWORK USA$425,000
SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY$300,000
SAVANNA INSTITUTE$294,961
EARTH INNOVATION INSTITUTE$245,133
ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION$213,500
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$209,325
ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERSHIP PROGRAM INC$186,010
AUSTIN PEAY STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION$163,250
THE CLIMATE CENTER$140,675
AMERICAN FORESTS$130,000
PLANET WOMEN$100,000
SILVIX RESOURCES$100,000
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY (WCS)$97,320
NEW RIVER CONSERVANCY$80,000
CONSERVATION X LABS$76,540
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 64% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%OMAHA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $95k → 12%ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION: $214k → 13%MONGABAY: $75k → 7%REVIVE & RESTORE: $300k → 8%THE CLIMATE CENTER: $141k → 9%SAMO FUND: $300k → 10%THE SOUTH FORK NATURAL HISTORY: $100k → 7%GROUNDWORK USA: $425k → 9%TURTLE CONSERVANCY: $387k → 17%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY (WCS): $97k → 28%QUIVIRA COALITION INC: $76k → 12%AMERICAN FORESTS: $130k → 14%SAVANNA INSTITUTE: $295k → 10%OREGON DESERT LAND TRUST: $830k → 10%SILVIX RESOURCES: $100k → 12%OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $75k → 15%YALE UNIVERSITY: $84k → 12%AUSTIN PEAY STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $163k → 11%SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY: $300k → 12%NEW RIVER CONSERVANCY: $80k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $102k → 9%PLANET WOMEN: $103k → 10%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $209k → 7%CAT ACTION TREASURY INC: $100k → 9%SAMO FUND: $300k → 10%SOLUTIONS PROJECT INC: $100k → 10%GROUNDWORK USA: $300k → 9%ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY: $1.0M → 17%OREGON NATURAL DESERT ASSOCIATION INC: $93k → 10%AUSTIN PEAY STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $100k → 11%UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON: $119k → 9%PLANET WOMEN: $100k → 10%CAT ACTION TREASURY INC: $100k → 9%SOLUTIONS PROJECT INC: $100k → 10%ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $775k → 17%PLANET WOMEN: $100k → 10%TIDES FOUNDATION: $275k → 10%ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $500k → 17%EARTH INNOVATION INSTITUTE: $245k → 10%TREEPEOPLE INC: $200k → 14%SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: $100k → 14%TREEPEOPLE INC: $200k → 14%TREEPEOPLE INC: $100k → 14%GLOBAL FISHING WATCH INC: $100k → 14%GLOBAL FISHING WATCH INC: $100k → 14%GLOBAL FISHING WATCH INC: $100k → 14%GLOBAL FISHING WATCH INC: $100k → 14%CONSERVATION X LABS: $77k → 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
WA
MT
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
SD
CT
CA
UT
CO
NE
WV
VA
MD
AZ
NM
TN
NC
DC
HI
GA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region — $52M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 8 regions, $51M to organizations and $1.0M to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

South America$34M · 65% · 115 grants · 24 people

Stated purpose: CONSERVATION PROJECTS · GRANTEE

Central America and the Caribbean$8.9M · 17% · 46 grants · 6 people

Stated purpose: CONSERVATION PROJECTS · GRANTEE

Sub-Saharan Africa$3.8M · 7% · 60 grants · 52 people

Stated purpose: CONSERVATION PROJECTS · GRANTEE

South Asia$1.9M · 4% · 17 grants · 12 people

Stated purpose: CONSERVATION PROJECTS · GRANTEE

East Asia and the Pacific$1.5M · 3% · 20 grants · 14 people

Stated purpose: CONSERVATION PROJECTS · GRANTEE

North America (Canada and Mexico)$1.0M · 2% · 14 grants · 4 people

Stated purpose: CONSERVATION PROJECTS · GRANTEE

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$846k · 2% · 13 grants · 9 people

Stated purpose: CONSERVATION PROJECTS · GRANTEE

Middle East and North Africa$23k · 0% · 3 people

Stated purpose: GRANTEE

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.

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.

64%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$7.3M · 38 repeat orgs$4.1M to everyone else

38 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2025, 25 since wound down; 29 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

38
31

Total granted

$7.3M
$2.0M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+16%
+44%

Still filing today

92%
65%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 42% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.1M 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
EnvironmentAnimalsEducationCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyArts & CultureOther

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

  • SM
    Santa Monica Mountains Fund
    2× · 2022–2023 · $600k · revenue +408% · 26% of their budget
  • TI
    TREEPEOPLE INC
    3× · 2020–2023 · $500k · revenue +58%
  • GF
    GLOBAL FISHING WATCH INC
    4× · 2020–2024 · $400k · revenue +127%

Funded once

  • OD
    OREGON DESERT LAND TRUST
    one grant, 2022 · $830k · revenue -13% · 39% of their budget
  • RR
    REVIVE & RESTOREgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $300k · revenue +69%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2024 · $102k · revenue +7%

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
Rainforest Trust

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

International
2
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
3
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
4
Cascadia Wildlands

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…

Environment
5
Nature and Culture International

Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.

Environment
6
Wildlife Conservation Network Inc

Connect conservationists and supporters, deploy resources to the field, provide conservationists with tools and support they need to succeed.

Animals
7
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
8
Wildcoast

The mission of wildcoast is to conserve coastal and marine ecosystems and address climate change through natural solutions. our staff is dedicated to conserving threatened and endangered coastlines and wildlife in california and mexico.…

Environment
9
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
10
Int'l Union for Conservation of Nature & Natural Resources - Us

Iucn-us fund builds bridges between us donors and iucn by catalyzing, accelerating, funding and promoting iucn's work - conserving nature and natural resources in the united states and throughout the world.

Environment
11
Greater Yellowstone Coalition

Greater yellowstone coalition works with all people to protect the lands, waters, and wildlife of the greater yellowstone ecosystem, now and for future generations.

Environment
12
CalWild

The California Wilderness Coalition protects the natural landscapes that make California unique, providing clean air and water, a home to wildlife, and a place for recreation and spiritual renewal.

—

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 Landberry Limited. 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 …Women & Girls Leadership De…Animal Rescue and ShelterPolicy Research and AdvocacyHealth Access Advocacy and …Community Foundations
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 28 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%4%<5yr14%18%5–10yr19%19%10–20yr16%23%20–35yr13%17%35–55yr16%20%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%1%<5yr14%18%5–10yr19%15%10–20yr16%21%20–35yr13%36%35–55yr16%10%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/104
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,461

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.

04the grantee network

90 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. 90 of the 104 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
24
Early backer (in before they grew)
86/90
Grantees still filing
50/90
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

OREGON DESERT LAND TRUST — $829,634 · EnvironmentOREGON DESERT LAND TRUSTTREEPEOPLE INC — $500,000 · EnvironmentTREEPEOPLE INCGLOBAL FISHING WATCH INC — $400,000 · EnvironmentGLOBAL FISHING WATCH INCCLIMATE CONSERVATION DBA CENTER FOR LARGE LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION — $315,000 · EnvironmentCLIMATE CONSERVATION DBA CENTER FOR …Southern Appalachian Highlands Conservancy — $300,000 · EnvironmentSouthern Appalachian Highlands Conse…SAVANNA INSTITUTE — $294,961 · EnvironmentSAVANNA INSTITUTESolutions Project Inc — $250,000 · EnvironmentSolutions Project IncNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION — $213,500 · EnvironmentCAT ACTION TREASURY INC — $200,000 · Environment+22 more — $1,351,500 · Environment+22 moreROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC — $2,275,000 · PhilanthropyROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROP…Earth Innovation Institute — $293,423 · PhilanthropyEarth Innovation Instit…TIDES FOUNDATION — $275,000 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUNDATION+3 more — $140,039 · PhilanthropySanta Monica Mountains Fund — $600,000 · OtherSanta Monica Mount…THE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $209,325 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERV…UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON — $175,949 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF WASH…OREGON NATURAL DESERT ASSOCIATION — $100,638 · OtherBOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA (MERCED) — $90,553 · OtherSMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION — $201,742 · OtherSMITHSONIAN INSTIT…+28 more — $978,856 · Other+28 moreTURTLE CONSERVANCY — $397,224 · AnimalsTURTLE CONSER…REVIVE & RESTORE — $300,000 · AnimalsREVIVE & REST…Wildlife Conservation Society — $182,320 · AnimalsWildlife Cons…GLOBAL CONSERVATION NETWORK — $148,000 · AnimalsGLOBAL CONSER…SOUTHEAST ALASKA INDIGINOUS TRANSBOUNDARY COMMISSI — $135,000 · AnimalsSOUTHEAST ALA…OMAHA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY — $115,000 · AnimalsOMAHA ZOOLOGI…American Bird Conservancy — $114,000 · AnimalsAmerican Bird…NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION — $107,500 · AnimalsNATIONAL WILD…CONSERVATION X LABS INC — $76,540 · AnimalsDefenders of Wildlife — $75,000 · Animals+5 more — $100,494 · Animals+5 moreENVIRONMENTAL LEADERSHIP PROGRAM INC — $383,340 · EducationENVIRONMENT…AUSTIN PEAY STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION — $263,250 · EducationAUSTIN PEAY…COLORADO PLATEAU FOUNDATION — $160,000 · EducationCOLORADO PL…The Climate Center — $140,675 · EducationThe Climate…PINE RIDGE GIRLS SCHOOL INC — $125,000 · EducationPINE RIDGE …UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION — $102,376 · EducationUNIVERSITY …Yale University — $84,000 · EducationYale Univer…LA COMPOST — $50,000 · EducationNATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY — $50,000 · Education+3 more — $52,787 · EducationGROUNDWORK USA INC — $725,000 · Community ImprovementNDN COLLECTIVE INC — $75,000 · Community ImprovementAPPALACHIAN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT — $35,000 · Community Improvement+2 more — $50,000 · Community ImprovementPLANET WOMEN — $303,000 · International
Environment$4,654,595Philanthropy$2,983,462Other$2,357,063Animals$1,751,078Education$1,411,428Community Improvement$885,000International$303,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC — $2,275,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetOREGON DESERT LAND TRUST — $829,634 over 1y, 39% of budgetGROUNDWORK USA INC — $725,000 over 2y, 5.2% of budgetSanta Monica Mountains Fund — $600,000 over 2y, 26% of budgetTREEPEOPLE INC — $500,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetGLOBAL FISHING WATCH INC — $400,000 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetTURTLE CONSERVANCY — $397,224 over 2y, 22% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL LEADERSHIP PROGRAM INC — $383,340 over 3y, 11% of budgetCLIMATE CONSERVATION DBA CENTER FOR LARGE LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION — $315,000 over 5y, 4.4% of budgetPLANET WOMEN — $303,000 over 3y, 6.9% of budgetSouthern Appalachian Highlands Conservancy — $300,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetREVIVE & RESTORE — $300,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetEarth Innovation Institute — $293,423 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION — $275,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAUSTIN PEAY STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION — $263,250 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetSolutions Project Inc — $250,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION — $213,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $209,325 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION — $201,742 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCAT ACTION TREASURY INC — $200,000 over 2y, 17% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society — $182,320 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCOLORADO PLATEAU FOUNDATION — $160,000 over 4y, 3.3% of budgetMONGABAY ORG CORP — $150,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetSOUTH FORK NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY — $150,000 over 2y, 9.2% of budgetOUR CHILDREN'S TRUST — $150,000 over 2y, 2.3% of budgetGLOBAL CONSERVATION NETWORK — $148,000 over 4y, 5.9% of budgetThe Climate Center — $140,675 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetSOUTHEAST ALASKA INDIGINOUS TRANSBOUNDARY COMMISSI — $135,000 over 5y, 30% of budgetAmerican Forests — $130,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetPINE RIDGE GIRLS SCHOOL INC — $125,000 over 5y, 4.2% of budgetOMAHA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY — $115,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAmerican Bird Conservancy — $114,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION — $107,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION — $102,376 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSILVIX RESOURCES — $100,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetYale University — $84,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNew River Conservancy — $80,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetTHE REGENERATION PROJECT — $75,000 over 2y, 3.6% of budgetNDN COLLECTIVE INC — $75,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetDefenders of Wildlife — $75,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetRE-VOLV — $75,000 over 2y, 6.8% of budgetCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION — $60,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOLORADO CATTLEMEN'S AGRICULTURAL LAND TRUST — $60,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNATIVE RENEWABLES INC — $50,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetLA COMPOST — $50,000 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetCOMITE CIVICO DEL VALLE INC — $50,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetNATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY — $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUtah Dine Bikeyah — $50,000 over 2y, 2.5% 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.

Leonardo Dicaprio Fou…PatagoniaorgThe Nature ConservancyThe Schmidt Family Fo…Clif Family FoundationResources Legacy FundCalifornia Community …ImpactassetsincNatural Resources Def…Rsf Social Finance IncWilburforce FoundationThe David and Lucile …
Leonardo Dicaprio FoundationCA38.6× affinity16 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Leonardo Dicaprio Foundation · Patagoniaorg · The Nature Conservancy · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Clif Family Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · California Community Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Wilburforce Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard 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 Rewild 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 · 20%3%10%23%40%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 12%
  • Urban Wood Economy Inc — 100% of income from government
  • African Aquatic Conservation Fund Inc — 55% of income from government
  • Yale University — 12% of income from government
  • Oregon Natural Desert Association — 9% of income from government
  • Northeast Wilderness Trust Corporation — 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
21report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely 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.

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 104 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 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