Skip to content
Sima Environmental Fund at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Sima Environmental Fund

The specific purpose of this corporation is to server as the environmental arm of the surf industry manufactures association ("sima") by raising money from the public through fundraisers and solicitations and using such funds to promote and support ecological and environmental organizations.

$250k
Granted FY2018
10
Grants FY2018
3
States reached
$120k
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, FY2017 to 2018.

Environment$352kReligion$10kRecreation & Sports$9k
02FY2018 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 10 grants below total $221,250, the rows itemized in this filing. The $250,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $28,750 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 · FY2018

  • Under $10k4 grants · $29k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $73k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $120k
$11,250
Median grant
3
States reached
$137k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SURFRIDER FOUNDATION$120,000
WILDCOAST$25,000
SAVE THE WAVES COALITION$13,750
HEAL THE BAY$12,500
ORANGE COUNTY COASTKEEPER$11,250
OCEAN INSTITUTE$10,000
SURFING EDUCATION ASSOCIATION$8,750
5 GYRES INSTITUTE$7,500
CLEAN OCEAN ACTION$6,250
SANTA BARBARA CHANNELKEEPER$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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–18) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 87% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%ORANGE COUNTY COASTKEEPER: $11k → 10%WILDCOAST: $19k → 11%SAVE THE WAVES COALITION: $14k → 13%5 GYRES INSTITUTE: $8k → 14%SANTA BARBARA CHANNELKEEPER: $6k → 14%SURFING EDUCATION ASSOCIATION: $9k → 9%CLEAN OCEAN ACTION: $6k → 6%SURFERS AGAINST SEWAGE: $8k → 9%ORANGE COUNTY COASTKEEPERS: $7k → 10%SAVE THE WAVES COALITION: $9k → 13%HEAL THE BAY: $13k → 14%SURFING EDUCATION ASSOCIATION: $7k → 9%SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $85k → 10%HEAL THE BAY: $7k → 14%OCEAN INSTITUTE: $10k → 10%OCEAN INSTITUTE: $7k → 10%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.
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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$343k · 7 repeat orgs$20k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +80% since the first grant, against +53% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2018, 0 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2018 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
3

Total granted

$343k
$20k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+80%
+53%

Still filing today

86%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2018, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18
EnvironmentReligionOther
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

  • TS
    THE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION
    2× · 2017–2018 · $205k · revenue +107%
  • W
    WILDCOAST
    2× · 2017–2018 · $44k · revenue +80%
  • ST
    Save the Waves Coalition
    2× · 2017–2018 · $23k · revenue +191%

Funded once

  • T5
    The 5 Gyres Institutegraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $8k · revenue +112%
  • CO
    CLEAN OCEAN ACTION INC
    one grant, 2018 · $6k · revenue +23%
  • SB
    SANTA BARBARA CHANNELKEEPER INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $6k · revenue +53%
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
Clean Reefs
Environment
2
Ocean Conservancy

Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.

Environment
3
California Coastkeeper dba California Coastkeeper Alliance

California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.

Environment
4
The Coral Reef and Marine Science Foundation Inc C/O James Bildner
—
5
Oceanworks Foundation
Environment
6
Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
—
7
Ocean Alliance Project

Protecting and promoting the marine biodiversity of Hawai'i through coral restoration, ecological monitoring, regenerative tourism, and cultural integration

Science & Tech
8
Schmidt Ocean Institute
Science & Tech
9
Coral Conservancy
—
10
California Ocean Alliance

The mission of the California Ocean Alliance is to conduct world-class marine research which leads directly to sound policy decisions that safeguard the oceans and allow marine mammals to thrive into the next century.

Science & Tech
11
Save Our Shores

The organizations mission is to steward clean shores, healthy habitats, and livingwaters to foster a thriving monterey bay and monterey bay national marine sanctuary.we focus on these three areas because we believe they are the most…

—
12
Turtle Island Restoration Network

To mobilize people in local communities around the world to protect marine wildlife and the oceans and inland watersheds that sustain them.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Save the Waves Coalition; the most unlike its peers is The 5 Gyres Institute. 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

10 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. 10 of the 11 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
9/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $204,630 · EnvironmentTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATIONWILDCOAST: $43,600 · EnvironmentWILDCOASTSave the Waves Coalition: $23,050 · EnvironmentSave the Waves CoalitionHEAL THE BAY: $19,940 · EnvironmentHEAL THE BAYOrange County Coastkeeper: $18,690 · EnvironmentOrange County Coastkeeper+2 more: $12,500 · EnvironmentSURFING EDUCATION ASSOCIATION: $15,260 · OtherThe 5 Gyres Institute: $7,500 · OtherOCEAN INSTITUTE: $17,440 · ReligionCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $8,370 · Philanthropy
Environment$322,410Other$22,760Religion$17,440Philanthropy$8,370

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $204,630 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetWILDCOAST: $43,600 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetSave the Waves Coalition: $23,050 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetHEAL THE BAY: $19,940 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetOrange County Coastkeeper: $18,690 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetOCEAN INSTITUTE: $17,440 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $8,370 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe 5 Gyres Institute: $7,500 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCLEAN OCEAN ACTION INC: $6,250 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSANTA BARBARA CHANNELKEEPER INC: $6,250 over 1y, 0.9% 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 Marisla FoundationPatagoniaorgSilicon Valley Commun…Resources Legacy FundOrange County Communi…Marin Community Found…Sempra FoundationNetwork for GoodAmerican Endowment Fo…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Paypal Charitable Giv…National Philanthropi…
The Marisla FoundationCA17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Marisla Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · Orange County Community Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · Sempra Foundation · Network for Good · American Endowment Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust

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 Sima Environmental Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Sima Environmental Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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 Sima Environmental Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Sima Environmental Fund 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 11 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 2018, released 2018. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2018, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Sima Environmental’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