Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

Sierra Club

To explore, enjoy, and protect the wild places of the earth; practice and promote responsible use of the earth's ecosystems and resources; educate and enlist humanity to protect and restore the quality of the natural and human environment; and use all lawful means to carry out these objectives.

$286k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$100k
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$8.7MHousing & Shelter$53kInternational$41kCivil Rights$28kPublic Safety & Disaster$24kAnimals$15kRecreation & Sports$10k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 7 grants below total $239,226 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $285,875 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $46,649 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

  • Under $10k2 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $73k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $150k
$28,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$152M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WOMEN'S MARCH INC$100,000
JESUS PEOPLE AGAINST POLLUTION$50,000
CHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK ACTION FUND$35,000
ARKANSAS ADVANCED ENERGY ASSOCIATION$28,000
WV ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL$10,000
MALAMA LEARNING CENTER$8,226
FERIA CALLE$8,000
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:

Your human-services grants (FY17–23, $201k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 83% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%YMCA OF METROPOLITAN DETROIT: $16k → 21%HARAMBEE HOUSE: $15k → 16%YMCA OF INDIANAPOLIS: $10k → 16%YMCA NATIONAL: $10k → 14%BRIDGING THE GAP IN VIRGINIA: $10k → 9%MICAH 68 MISSION: $30k → 17%YMCA OF DETROIT: $10k → 21%PROGRESO LATINO INC: $8k → 14%HARAMBEE HOUSE: $10k → 16%MICAH 68 MISSION: $10k → 17%TIDES CENTER: $15k → 10%RURAL UTAH PROJECT EDUCATION FUND: $25k → 8%TRI CITY CDC: $10k → 21%WESTERN CLEAN ENERGY CAMPAIGN - TIDES CENTER: $10k → 12%TIDES FOUNDATION FOR YOUNG FEMINIST FUND: $5k → 17%SOUL TRAK OUTDOORS: $8k → 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
VT
WA
ID
MT
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
WY
SD
IN
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
MD
AZ
NM
KS
AR
NC
SC
DC
HI
LA
MS
AL
GA
TX
FL

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.

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.

39%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$3.3M · 68 repeat orgs$5.3M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +54% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.

68 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 66 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

68
247

Total granted

$3.3M
$5.0M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+54%
+25%

Still filing today

82%
81%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 8% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $221k 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
EnvironmentCommunity ImprovementEducationHuman ServicesCivil RightsPublic BenefitOther

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

  • G
    GreenLatinos
    7× · 2017–2024 · $136k · revenue ×15
  • Earth Island Institute Inc
    4× · 2019–2022 · $131k · revenue +171%
  • RA
    Rainforest Action Network
    6× · 2019–2024 · $84k · revenue +21%

Funded once

  • CF
    CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS ACTION FUND
    one grant, 2020 · $1.0M · revenue -18%
  • RT
    RISE TO THRIVE
    one grant, 2022 · $225k
  • GI
    GRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $200k · revenue +56%

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
California Environmental Justice Alliance

Our mission is to fight against fossil fuel executives and industries that have turned our communities into dumping grounds for toxic waste, poisoning our air, water, lan, and bodies. We organize to oppose giant oil refineries, dirty…

Environment
2
Nature for Justice

To empower frontline communities to lead nature-based solutions that advance climate justice, ecosystem restoration, and resilient livelihoods through connecting locally-led initiatives to funding, markets, and technical support.

Environment
3
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators

The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.

Education
4
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
5
Partnership for Policy Integrity

Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.

Environment
6
Earthcorps

To cultivate leaders and community partnerships to advance environmental justice.

International
7
Boulder Watershed Collective

The Boulder Watershed Collective is a 501c3 non-profit stakeholder-driven organization established to address forested watershed health,resiliency and stewardship. We have three program areas: ClimateAdaptation and Resilience Watershed…

Environment
8
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
9
California Environmental Voters

To increase public awareness of elected officials' performances on environmental issues, to influence decisions of public officials on environmental legislation and policy, and to engage in related social welfare activities to promote and…

Civil Rights
10
Center for Environmental Law & Policy

The Center for Environmental Law & Policy is a statewide organization whose mission is to protect, preserve and restore Washington's waters through education, advocacy, policy reform, and public interest litigation.

Environment
11
Environmental Law and Policy Center of the Midwest

The environmental law & policy center (elpc) is the midwest's leading public interest environmental legal advocacy and ecobusiness innovation organization, and among the nation's leaders. we develop and lead successful strategic…

Environment
12
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment

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 Friends of Stone Lakes National Wildlife. 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 …Community FoundationsAffordable Housing Developm…Military Veterans SupportYmca Youth DevelopmentAffordable Housing Construc…Developmental Disabilities …Health Access Advocacy and …Faith-Based Liberal Arts Co…Women & Girls Leadership De…Community College Foundatio…Immigrant Worker SupportPolicy Research and Advocacy
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 22 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%4%<5yr14%12%5–10yr19%27%10–20yr16%31%20–35yr13%17%35–55yr16%9%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%4%<5yr14%11%5–10yr19%20%10–20yr16%40%20–35yr13%18%35–55yr16%8%55yr+

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

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
1%4/325
the rest of the field
13%
240,393/1,819,240

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

277 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. 277 of the 327 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.

7
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
105
Early backer (in before they grew)
265/277
Grantees still filing
194/277
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

CENTRO PARA LA CONSERVACION DEL PAISAJE — $231,400 · OtherCENTRO PARA LA CONSERVACION DEL PAISAJERISE TO THRIVE — $225,000 · OtherRISE TO THRIVEINICIATIVA ECODES BAHIA JOBOS — $110,000 · Other+94 more — $2,627,261 · Other+94 moreGreenLatinos — $135,500 · EnvironmentGreenLatinosEarth Island Institute Inc — $130,999 · EnvironmentEarth Island Institute IncRainforest Action Network — $84,000 · EnvironmentMN350 — $78,000 · EnvironmentDINE CITIZENS AGAINST RUINING OUR ENVIRONMENT — $69,500 · Environment+60 more — $1,514,625 · Environment+60 moreCENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS ACTION FUND — $1,000,000 · Public BenefitCENTER FOR AMERI…+6 more — $116,000 · Public Benefit+6 moreCoalicion Pro Corredor Ecologico Del Noreste Inc — $132,400 · Community ImprovementCoalicion…SOUTHERN SECTOR RISING — $76,765 · Community ImprovementSOUTHERN …WEST MARION INC — $72,500 · Community ImprovementWEST MARI…APRODEC INC — $70,000 · Community ImprovementAPRODEC I…MOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER — $65,000 · Community ImprovementMOVEMENT …BOLD EDUCATION FUND INC — $55,600 · Community ImprovementBOLD EDUC…NEW ALPHA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $51,100 · Community ImprovementNEW ALPHA…CAMBIO PR INC — $30,000 · Community ImprovementVIRGINIA ORGANIZING INC — $30,000 · Community ImprovementNATIVE MOVEMENT — $30,000 · Community ImprovementHASER Inc — $25,000 · Community ImprovementKEEP GROWING DETROIT — $23,200 · Community Improvement+2 more — $25,000 · Community ImprovementNORTH VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $137,644 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES — $68,650 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS INC — $47,983 · PhilanthropyCALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $43,197 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUNDATION — $28,800 · PhilanthropyGRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC — $200,000 · InternationalUS Human Rights Network — $41,000 · InternationalPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY — $22,500 · InternationalCENTER FOR VOTER INFORMATION — $50,000 · Civil RightsCHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK ACTION FUND INC — $35,000 · Civil RightsWOMEN'S ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION — $32,331 · Civil RightsLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $30,000 · Civil RightsACLU Foundation of Texas Inc — $27,500 · Civil RightsUNITED WE DREAM NETWORK INC — $20,000 · Civil RightsFLORIDA RISING TOGETHER INC — $20,000 · Civil RightsRIGHT TO THE CITY ALLIANCE — $15,000 · Civil RightsGRASSROOTS GLOBAL JUSTICE — $10,000 · Civil Rights
Other$3,193,661Environment$2,012,624Public Benefit$1,116,000Community Improvement$686,565Philanthropy$326,274International$263,500Civil Rights$239,831

Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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 budgetCENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS ACTION FUND — $1,000,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetGRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC — $200,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetNORTH VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $137,644 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGreenLatinos — $135,500 over 7y, 3.9% of budgetEarth Island Institute Inc — $130,999 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetTexas Conservation Alliance — $100,000 over 1y, 9.4% of budgetRainforest Action Network — $84,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetTHE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC — $82,696 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetMN350 — $78,000 over 5y, 1.7% of budgetSOUTHERN SECTOR RISING — $76,765 over 1y, 24% of budgetINDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK — $76,099 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetWEST MARION INC — $72,500 over 2y, 5.0% of budgetDINE CITIZENS AGAINST RUINING OUR ENVIRONMENT — $69,500 over 4y, 8.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES — $68,650 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetSIERRA NEVADA ALLIANCE — $66,000 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetMOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER — $65,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetEL PUENTE DE WILLIAMSBURG INC — $65,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetWEST VIRGINIA CITIZEN ACTION GROUP — $63,000 over 1y, 24% of budgetSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC — $62,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC — $61,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWest Harlem Environmental Action Inc — $56,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetBOLD EDUCATION FUND INC — $55,600 over 2y, 4.5% of budgetGWICHIN STEERING COMMITTEE — $55,000 over 3y, 9.9% of budgetGREENFAITH INC — $50,478 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetCENTER FOR VOTER INFORMATION — $50,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetRENEWABLE ENERGY WILDLIFE INSTITUTE — $50,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS INC — $47,983 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetTHE ROSE FOUNDATION FOR COMMUNITIES THE ENVIRONMENT — $47,633 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetWest Virginia Environmental Council — $46,000 over 3y, 16% of budgetLawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law — $44,900 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetHEALTHY GULF — $44,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetCALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $43,197 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVOICES FOR A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE — $42,500 over 3y, 4.5% of budgetPROGRESSNOW COLORADO — $42,000 over 3y, 5.8% of budgetBOLD ALLIANCE INC — $40,000 over 1y, 9.6% of budgetHIP HOP CAUCUS EDUCATION FUND — $40,000 over 2y, 5.1% of budgetGLOBAL WARMING EXPRESS — $39,852 over 3y, 88% of budgetMICAH SIX EIGHT MISSION — $39,500 over 2y, 6.2% of budgetEarthworks — $37,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetOutward Bound Adventures — $36,500 over 2y, 7.6% of budgetOregon Natural Resources Council Fund Oregon Wild — $36,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetRocky Mountain Institute — $36,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCOLUMBIA RIVER BIOREGIONAL EDUCATION PROJECT — $35,600 over 1y, 39% of budgetREBUILDING TOGETHER PITTSBURGH — $35,029 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetSouth River Watershed Alliance — $35,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetCHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK ACTION FUND INC — $35,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetThe Partnership Project Inc — $35,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetVerde Inc — $35,000 over 1y, 0.5% 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.

United States Energy …PatagoniaorgNatural Resources Def…Windward FundRockefeller Family Fu…The Schmidt Family Fo…Solutions Project IncResources Legacy FundThe Energy FoundationSocial and Environmen…Amalgamated Charitabl…The Partnership Proje…
United States Energy FoundationCA86.6× affinity59 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United States Energy Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · Windward Fund · Rockefeller Family Fund Inc · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Solutions Project Inc · Resources Legacy Fund · The Energy Foundation · Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Partnership Project Inc

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 Sierra Club 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 · 60%6%23%51%90%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 3%
  • Coalition of Communities of Color — 15% of income from government
  • Eastie Farm Inc — 13% of income from government
  • Verde Inc — 3% of income from government
  • Lewis & Clark College — 2% of income from government
  • Oregon Natural Resources Council Fund Oregon Wild — 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
6get no government money at all
43report 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

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 327 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 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