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

· Public charity

Sierra Club Foundation

See schedule o.the SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION promotes efforts to educate and empower people to protect and improve the natural and human environment.goals: - solve the climate crisis primarily through a successful transition to a resource-efficient clean energy economy that better serves people and nature;- secure protections for public…

$44M
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$44M
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$702MEducation$1.0MPhilanthropy$678kCommunity Improvement$516kCivil Rights$275kArts & Culture$208kHousing & Shelter$205kInternational$159kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $120k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $448k
  • $250k+1 grant · $44M
$50,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$192M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SIERRA CLUB$43,795,738
JEWISH FEDERATION OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO$247,904
WEST VIRGINIA CITIZEN ACTION EDUCATION FUND$50,000
ATMOS LTD$50,000
FOR A BETTER BAYOU$50,000
CENTER FOR PROGRESSIVE REFORM$50,000
CONFLUENCE PHILANTHROPY$30,000
THE ASPEN INSTITUTE$25,000
BLUE SKY INSTITUTE$25,000
TRIBAL LINK FOUNDATION$20,000
THE CRANE INSTITUTE OF SUSTAINABILITY$20,000
AUDUBON SOCIETY OF NEW YORK STATE$6,250
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 (FY23–25, $50k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, 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%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERS OF CHICAGO: $16k → 14%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERS OF CHICAGO: $13k → 14%TRIBAL LINK FOUNDATION: $20k → 17%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

AK
VT
WA
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
SD
PA
NJ
CA
UT
CO
MO
WV
VA
MD
NM
TN
NC
SC
DC
LA
MS
GA
FL
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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$700M · 26 repeat orgs$5.1M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +99% since the first grant, against +7% for those funded once.

26 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 22 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
68

Total granted

$700M
$4.8M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+99%
+7%

Still filing today

100%
94%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $270k 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 ImprovementPublic BenefitEducationInternationalHuman ServicesOther
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

  • SA
    SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC
    4× · 2017–2023 · $760k · revenue +490%
  • The Partnership Project Inc
    3× · 2020–2023 · $650k · revenue +15%
  • COMMUNITY INITIATIVES
    3× · 2020–2024 · $620k · revenue +158%

Funded once

  • PM
    POPULATION MEDIA CENTER INC
    one grant, 2022 · $939k · revenue 0%
  • MOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER
    one grant, 2018 · $320k · revenue -2%
  • SG
    SEVENTH GENERATION FUND FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $250k · revenue +54%
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
Western Resource Advocates

Western Resource Advocates (WRA) is a regional nonprofit advocacy organization fighting climate change and its impacts to sustain the environment, economy, and people of the West. As the region's go-to experts for more than three decades,…

Crime & Legal
2
CarbonPlan

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

Environment
3
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
4
One Earth Philanthropy

One Earth connects thinkers, doers, activists, and knowledge holders from around the world to solve humanity's greatest ecological challenges--together. Our belief is simple: The solutions to the climate crisis already exist. By connecting…

Environment
5
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
6
Partnership for Policy Integrity

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

Environment
7
Climate Foundation

To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.

Science & Tech
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
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
10
Cascade Climate Inc

To accelerate progress in interventions that harness Earths natural systems to stabilize the climate.

Environment
11
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
12
E3G Third Generation Environmentalism

E3g is a leading international not-for-profit think tank specialising in climate diplomacy harnessing expertise in the politics and economics of climate change.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc; the most unlike its peers is Born Free Foundation. 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

102 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. 102 of the 105 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.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
30
Early backer (in before they grew)
101/102
Grantees still filing
61/102
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SIERRA CLUB: $694,981,620 · OtherSIERRA CLUB+33 more: $2,043,295 · OtherSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $760,000 · EnvironmentThe Partnership Project Inc: $650,000 · EnvironmentMICHIGAN ENVIROMENTAL COUNCIL: $250,000 · EnvironmentGreenLatinos: $200,000 · EnvironmentSolutions Project Inc: $200,000 · EnvironmentEnvironmental Health Coalition: $195,000 · EnvironmentMINNESOTA CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCACY: $141,000 · Environment+38 more: $1,677,178 · EnvironmentCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES: $620,000 · PhilanthropyROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $250,000 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUNDATION: $250,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDERATION OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $247,904 · PhilanthropyCONFLUENCE PHILANTHROPY INC: $150,000 · Philanthropy+1 more: $50,000 · PhilanthropyPOPULATION MEDIA CENTER INC: $939,274 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY FOUNDATION: $254,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $88,600 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION: $60,000 · EducationWEST VIRGINIA CITIZEN ACTION EDUCATION FUND: $50,000 · Education+2 more: $60,000 · EducationSEVENTH GENERATION FUND FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES INC: $250,000 · Human ServicesLatino Community Fund of Washington State: $205,000 · Human ServicesJewish Community Centers of Chicago: $29,573 · Human ServicesTRIBAL LINK FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 · Human ServicesMOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER: $320,000 · Community ImprovementALLIANCE FOR A JUST SOCIETY: $30,000 · Community ImprovementVIRGINIA ORGANIZING INC: $30,000 · Community ImprovementCoalicion Pro Corredor Ecologico Del Noreste Inc: $25,000 · Community ImprovementNATIVE MOVEMENT: $15,000 · Community Improvement+1 more: $10,500 · Community ImprovementRIGHT TO THE CITY ALLIANCE: $175,000 · Civil RightsFLORIDA RISING TOGETHER INC: $144,200 · Civil RightsPROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA: $70,000 · Civil Rights
Other$697,024,915Environment$4,073,178Philanthropy$1,567,904Education$1,451,874Human Services$504,573Community Improvement$430,500Civil Rights$389,200

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 budgetSIERRA CLUB: $694,981,620 over 9y, 56% of budgetPOPULATION MEDIA CENTER INC: $939,274 over 1y, 9.9% of budgetSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $760,000 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetThe Partnership Project Inc: $650,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES: $620,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetRocky Mountain Institute: $388,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetMOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER: $320,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY FOUNDATION: $254,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetSEVENTH GENERATION FUND FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES INC: $250,000 over 1y, 8.6% of budgetMICHIGAN ENVIROMENTAL COUNCIL: $250,000 over 1y, 4.6% of budgetROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $250,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $250,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $247,904 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLatino Community Fund of Washington State: $205,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetGreenLatinos: $200,000 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetSolutions Project Inc: $200,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetEnvironmental Health Coalition: $195,000 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetRIGHT TO THE CITY ALLIANCE: $175,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetGRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC: $175,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetVerde Inc: $150,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetCONFLUENCE PHILANTHROPY INC: $150,000 over 8y, 1.8% of budgetFLORIDA RISING TOGETHER INC: $144,200 over 3y, 2.0% of budgetMINNESOTA CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCACY: $141,000 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetEarth Island Institute Inc: $114,812 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetGreen 20: $110,000 over 2y, 5.1% of budgetCITIZEN ACTION OF WISCONSIN EDUCATION FUND INC: $100,000 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetVERMONT ENERGY INVESTMENT CORPORATION: $100,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNONPROFIT LEGAL SERVICES OF UTAH: $100,000 over 1y, 8.4% of budgetSUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBlueGreen Alliance Foundation: $100,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCENTRO DE PERIODISMO INVESTIGATIVO INC: $95,000 over 1y, 6.8% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $88,600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWashington Interfaith Network: $75,000 over 2y, 15% of budgetOf Salt and Sand: $75,000 over 1y, 76% of budgetWest Harlem Environmental Action Inc: $75,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetPOWER SHIFT NETWORK: $75,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetEarthworks: $60,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION: $60,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRACK ACTION FUND INC: $60,000 over 1y, 25% of budgetUNITED STATES ENERGY FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWinyah Rivers Foundation Inc: $50,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetATMOS LTD: $50,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetNW ENERGY COALITION: $50,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetRIO GRANDE RETURN: $50,000 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetAS YOU SOW: $50,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetSIERRA FOOTHILLS AUDUBON SOCIETY: $50,000 over 1y, 64% of budgetAPPALACHIAN MOUNTAIN ADVOCATES INC: $50,000 over 1y, 3.5% of budgetSUNRISE MOVEMENT EDUCATION FUND: $50,000 over 1y, 8.5% 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.

PatagoniaorgSierra ClubUnited States Energy …Amalgamated Charitabl…Windward FundNatural Resources Def…The Schmidt Family Fo…The Energy FoundationTides CenterEnvironmental Defense…Rockefeller Family Fu…Tides Foundation
PatagoniaorgCA43.8× affinity23 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Patagoniaorg · Sierra Club · United States Energy Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Windward Fund · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · The Schmidt Family Foundation · The Energy Foundation · Tides Center · Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated · Rockefeller Family Fund Inc · Tides 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 Sierra Club Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Sierra Club Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 80%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 15%
  • Vermont Energy Investment Corporation: 15% of income from government
  • Verde Inc: 3% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
8get no government money at all
15report 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 105 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 Sierra Club’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