Skip to content
Save the Redwoods League at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Save the Redwoods League

SAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUE protects and restores redwood forests and connects people with their peace and beauty so these wonders of the natural world flourish.

$3.8M
Granted FY2025still arriving
36
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$2.0M
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 2025.

Environment$16MRecreation & Sports$5.3MScience & Tech$2.5MEducation$955kArts & Culture$258kAnimals$123kYouth Development$93kEmployment$57kOther$0
02FY2025 · 36 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k21 grants · $130k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $97k
  • $50k–250k7 grants · $464k
  • $250k+4 grants · $3.1M
$6,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$209M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FOUNDATION FOR AMERICAS PUBLIC LANDS$2,000,000
YUROK TRIBE FISHERIES DEPARTMENT$566,683
INTERTRIBAL SINKYONE WILDERNESS COUNCIL$279,855
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY$272,675
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS$85,848
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT$80,000
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION$76,000
COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY$65,553
BOARD OF REGENTS NEVADA SYSTEM OF HIGHER EDUCATION$56,437
AMHERST COLLEGE$50,000
CAL POLY HUMBOLDT SPONSORED PROGRAMS FOUNDATION$50,000
NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY$49,314
CAL POLY HUMBOLDT FOUNDATION$20,933
HUMBOLDT COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION$15,602
GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVANCY$11,000
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 (FY21–25, $46k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 87% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%UNITY CARE GROUP: $6k → 8%REDWOOD COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY: $5k → 18%FIRST PLACE FOR YOUTH: $6k → 10%FIRST PLACE FOR YOUTH: $6k → 10%FIRST PLACE FOR YOUTH: $6k → 10%FIRST PLACE FOR YOUTH: $6k → 10%FIRST PLACE FOR YOUTH: $5k → 10%CENTRO DEL PUEBLO MOVIMIENTO INDIGENA MIGRANTE: $6k → 18%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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
WI
NY
MA
NV
WY
CA
UT
CO
AZ
DC
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$21M · 39 repeat orgs$3.6M to everyone else

39 repeat relationships: 24 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 12 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

39
50

Total granted

$21M
$1.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+15%
+60%

Still filing today

54%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 41% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.2M 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
EnvironmentEducationYouth DevelopmentHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • CP
    CAL POLY HUMBOLDT SPONSORED PROGRAMS FOUNDATION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.3M · revenue +136%
  • L
    LandPaths
    5× · 2017–2025 · $432k · revenue +89%
  • MP
    MOUNTAIN PARKS FOUNDATION OF SANTA CRUZ
    3× · 2018–2022 · $265k · revenue +176%

Funded once

  • PO
    PENINSULA OPEN SPACE TRUSTgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $356k · revenue +106%
  • SF
    SEMPERVIRENS FUNDgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $356k · revenue +37%
  • AR
    AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE
    one grant, 2017 · $45k
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
California Wildlife Foundation

The foundation works with diverse groups representing many interests to acquire and restore critical wildlife habitat and protecting species

Animals
2
Nature Collective

Nature collective's mission is to drive a passion for nature for all. we think inclusively and diversely when serving those devoid of nature those who remember nature and want to connect back to it and those who have an affinity with…

Environment
3
Sonoma Botanical Garden
—
4
Sonoma Mountain Institute
Environment
5
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
6
Sierra Foothill Conservancy

Protect, manage and preserve lands and wildlife having unique natural resources and cultural qualities within and near the foothills of the sierra nevada range.

Environment
7
California Institute for Biodiversity

Create and publish educational materials, conduct professional development, promote awareness, and sponsor research on the spectacular biological diversity of the State of CA.

Education
8
Elkhorn Slough Foundation

The Elkhorn Slough Foundation's mission is to conserve and restore Elkhorn Slough and its watershed, California's largest tidal salt marsh south of San Francisco Bay. Renowned for its extraordinary biodiversity, Elkhorn Slough features a…

Philanthropy
9
Parks California

As california state parks' statutory non-profit partner, we have a clear mission - to help strengthen parks and inspire all people to experience these extraordinary places.

Environment
10
Friends of Santa Cruz State Parks

Friends of santa cruz state parks is a vital partner to california state parks, creatively working to ensure parks and beaches throughout santa cruz county and coastal san mateo county are thriving and available to all.

—
11
Save the Redwoods League

Save the redwoods league protects and restores redwood forests and connects people with their peace and beauty so these wonders of the natural world flourish.

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.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Santa Monica Mountains Fund; the most unlike its peers is Intertribal Sinkyone Wilderness Council. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

65 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. 65 of the 103 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
18
Early backer (in before they grew)
65/65
Grantees still filing
41/65
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NATIONAL MALL AND MEMORIAL PARKS: $7,210,992 · OtherNATIONAL MALL AND MEMORIAL PARKSCALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CANDLESTICK POINT STATE RECR: $5,182,199 · OtherCALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CANDLESTICK POINT STATE RECRUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS: $1,439,133 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVISCALIFORNIA STATE COASTAL CONSERVANCY: $1,013,373 · OtherCALIFORNIA STATE COASTAL CONSERVANCYYUROK TRIBE: $799,823 · OtherREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT BERKELEY: $686,481 · Other+47 more: $2,234,307 · Other+47 moreTHE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT FOUNDATION: $2,000,000 · EnvironmentTHE BUREAU OF L…LandPaths: $432,001 · EnvironmentLandPathsPENINSULA OPEN SPACE TRUST: $356,250 · EnvironmentPENINSULA OPEN …SEMPERVIRENS FUND: $356,250 · EnvironmentSEMPERVIRENS FU…+15 more: $347,021 · Environment+15 moreCAL POLY HUMBOLDT SPONSORED PROGRAMS FOUNDATION: $2,349,850 · EducationCAL POLY HUM…+16 more: $295,415 · Education+16 moreBROTHERS ON THE RISE: $18,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SAN FRANCISCO: $17,000 · Youth DevelopmentYOUTH SPIRIT ARTWORKS: $12,000 · Youth DevelopmentCAMP PHOENIX: $6,000 · Youth DevelopmentCIVICORPS: $6,000 · Youth DevelopmentYES Nature to Neighborhoods: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentFIRST PLACE FOR YOUTH: $29,000 · Human ServicesTHE UNITY CARE GROUP: $6,000 · Human ServicesCENTRO DEL PUEBLO MOVIMIENTO INDIGENA MIGRANTE: $6,000 · Human ServicesRedwood Community Action Agency: $5,000 · Human ServicesSAN MATEO COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION FOUNDATION: $18,000 · Recreation & SportsOakland Parks and Recreation Foundation: $10,000 · Recreation & SportsCOMMUNITY NATURE CONNECTION: $6,000 · Recreation & SportsPOINT REYES BIRD OBSERVATORY: $30,363 · Animals
Other$18,566,308Environment$3,491,522Education$2,645,265Youth Development$64,000Human Services$46,000Recreation & Sports$34,000Animals$30,363

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCAL POLY HUMBOLDT SPONSORED PROGRAMS FOUNDATION: $2,349,850 over 9y, 1.4% of budgetLandPaths: $432,001 over 5y, 25% of budgetPENINSULA OPEN SPACE TRUST: $356,250 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetSEMPERVIRENS FUND: $356,250 over 1y, 3.9% of budgetINTERTRIBAL SINKYONE WILDERNESS COUNCIL: $327,155 over 3y, 22% of budgetMOUNTAIN PARKS FOUNDATION OF SANTA CRUZ: $265,000 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetGOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVANCY: $104,847 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetAMHERST COLLEGE TRUSTEES: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCSU BAKERSFIELD AUXILIARY FOR SPONSORED PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION: $44,780 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSEQUOIA PARKS CONSERVANCY: $43,304 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetMother Lode Land Trust: $40,000 over 1y, 28% of budgetTHE TOWER FOUNDATION OF SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY: $34,025 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPOINT REYES BIRD OBSERVATORY: $30,363 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFIRST PLACE FOR YOUTH: $29,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY FRESNO FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHUMBOLDT REDWOODS INTERPRETIVE ASSN: $25,000 over 2y, 5.0% of budgetREDWOOD PARKS CONSERVANCY: $25,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetANCIENT FOREST SOCIETY: $25,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetCalifornia Native Plant Society: $24,870 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $23,887 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCAL POLY HUMBOLDT FOUNDATION: $20,933 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCOLGATE UNIVERSITY: $19,953 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAN MATEO COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION FOUNDATION: $18,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetSANTA LUCIA CONSERVANCY: $18,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetBROTHERS ON THE RISE: $18,000 over 3y, 4.3% of budgetVIDA VERDE NATURE EDUCATION: $18,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SAN FRANCISCO: $17,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetExploring New Horizons: $17,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetSmith River Alliance Inc: $15,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCALIFONIA STATE UNIVERSITY EAST BAY FOUNDATION INC: $13,837 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSAVED BY NATURE: $12,000 over 2y, 4.7% of budgetCOMMUNITY SCHOOL FOR CREATIVE EDUCATION: $12,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetHarbor Community Development Corp: $12,000 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetYOUTH SPIRIT ARTWORKS: $12,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetWILDERNESS ARTS AND LITERACY COLLABORATIVE: $12,000 over 2y, 5.5% of budgetCAL POLY POMONA FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA LIBRARY ASSOCIATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES: $7,880 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES: $6,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE UNITY CARE GROUP: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCAMP PHOENIX: $6,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCIVICORPS: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF SAUSAL CREEK: $6,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetEEL RIVER RECOVERY PROJECT INC: $6,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetWILDCARE: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBig Sur Land Trust: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetREAL OPTIONS FOR CITY KIDS: $6,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

  • Who funds CAL POLY HUMBOLDT SPONSORED PROGRAMS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds LandPaths ↗
  • Who funds PENINSULA OPEN SPACE TRUST ↗
  • Who funds SEMPERVIRENS FUND ↗
  • Who funds INTERTRIBAL SINKYONE WILDERNESS COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds MOUNTAIN PARKS FOUNDATION OF SANTA CRUZ ↗
  • Who funds GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds AMHERST COLLEGE TRUSTEES ↗
  • Who funds CSU BAKERSFIELD AUXILIARY FOR SPONSORED PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION ↗
  • Who funds SEQUOIA PARKS CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds Mother Lode Land Trust ↗
  • Who funds THE TOWER FOUNDATION OF SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds POINT REYES BIRD OBSERVATORY ↗
  • Who funds FIRST PLACE FOR YOUTH ↗
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY FRESNO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds HUMBOLDT REDWOODS INTERPRETIVE ASSN ↗
  • Who funds REDWOOD PARKS CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds ANCIENT FOREST SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds FUNGUS FEDERATION OF SANTA CRUZ ↗

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 Joseph and Vera L…Parks CaliforniaResources Legacy FundThe San Francisco Fou…National Fish and Wil…Humboldt Area Foundat…East Bay Community Fo…Clif Family FoundationCalifornia State Park…The Dean Witter Found…Foundation for Califo…Community Foundation …
The Joseph and Vera Long FoundationCA31.5× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Joseph and Vera Long Foundation · Parks California · Resources Legacy Fund · The San Francisco Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Humboldt Area Foundation · East Bay Community Foundation · Clif Family Foundation · California State Parks Foundation · The Dean Witter Foundation · Foundation for California Community Colleges · Community Foundation Santa Cruz County

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Amherst College Trustees: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
20report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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 103 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 Save the Redwoods League’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