· Public charity
Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc
The mission of social and environmental entrepreneurs (see), inc.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 41% of SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 130 grants below total $6,937,365 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $10,386,015 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $3,448,650 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 · FY2024
- Under $10k8 grants · $55k
- $10k–50k60 grants · $1.3M
- $50k–250k59 grants · $4.2M
- $250k+3 grants · $1.4M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FOUNDATION TO PROMOTE OPEN SOCIETY | $760,220 |
| THE VICTORIA PROJECT INC | $379,830 |
| PESTICIDE ACTION NETWORK | $253,986 |
| ALLFED INSTITUTE | $180,000 |
| TALLAHASSEE FOOD NETWORK INC (TFN) | $170,000 |
| THE OUTLAW PROJECT | $164,000 |
| HARAMBEE HOUSE INC | $160,000 |
| CORAL VITA INC | $150,000 |
| MOBILE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ACTION COALITION | $122,500 |
| TEXAS ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVOCACY SERVICES | $120,000 |
| CENTER ON RACE POVERTY & THE ENVIRONMENT (CRPE) | $117,340 |
| PUGET SOUND SAGE | $115,000 |
| STARTING OVER INC | $107,136 |
| ALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION ON TOXICS | $100,000 |
| STEP UP LOUISIANA ORGANIZING FUND | $97,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY18–24, $2.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 89% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
Grants abroad, by region — $2.1M on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 9 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: COLLABORATION GRANT
Stated purpose: COLLABORATION GRANT
Stated purpose: COLLABORATION GRANT
Stated purpose: COLLABORATION GRANT
Stated purpose: COLLABORATION GRANT
Stated purpose: COLLABORATION GRANT
Stated purpose: COLLABORATION GRANT
Stated purpose: COLLABORATION GRANT
Stated purpose: COLLABORATION GRANT
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +29% since the first grant, against +6% for the ones you funded once.
139 repeat relationships — 56 still active in FY2024, 83 since wound down; 65 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 48% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.4M went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- SASOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC4× · 2017–2022 · $490k · revenue +490%
- ACALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION ON TOXICS3× · 2022–2024 · $425k · revenue +147%
- HHHarambee House Inc3× · 2021–2024 · $420k · revenue +122%
Funded once
- TBTEMPLE BETH AMone grant, 2018 · $2.0M
- SPSolutions Project Incgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $760k · revenue +72%
- GIGRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $648k · revenue +56%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
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.
Serve as a partner, educator, and guide for philanthropy in reimagining practices that advance a thriving and just world.
Forward Together is a national reproductive justice organization that centers people, families, and communities who experience reproductive oppression. They prioritize queer, trans, Black, Indigenous, and other peoples of color and utilize…
The Alliance for Collective Action convenes leaders of environmental and social movements to advance solutions for a thriving planet. We advance our mission through the Alliance Center building and community, as well as through Collective…
Oregon Justice Network is an alliance built and staffed by criminal legal system impacted people advocating for the well-being of people affected or at-risk of being affected by carceral systems. Our work centers around restorative…
To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with Indigenous communities in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability, and the preservation of the Amazon Basin's…
Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
The Corporation is organized exclusively for charitable and educational purposes. Earthworks is dedicated to protecting communities and the environment from the impacts of irresponsible mineral and energy development while seeking…
The Organization unleashes the creative potential of the law to protect people and the planet from corporate abuse.
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 Texas Alternative Home School. 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.
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 17 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 8% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
428 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. 428 of the 525 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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
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.
- Who funds FOUNDATION TO PROMOTE OPEN SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Solutions Project Inc ↗
- Who funds GRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC ↗
- Who funds Inclusive Development International ↗
- Who funds ALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION ON TOXICS ↗
- Who funds Harambee House Inc ↗
- Who funds Miami Workers Center Inc ↗
- Who funds Alliance for Global Justice Corp ↗
- Who funds ALTERNATIVES FOR COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENT INC ↗
- Who funds WECOUNT ↗
- Who funds THE VICTORIA PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR WASHINGTONS FUTURE ↗
- Who funds NATURES GARDEN FOR VICTORY AND PEACE INC ↗
- Who funds Little Village Environmental Justice Org ↗
- Who funds Pesticide Action Network North America ↗
- Who funds ALIANZA CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Tallahassee Food Network ↗
- Who funds UPROSE INC ↗
- Who funds West Atlanta Watershed Alliance ↗
- Who funds EAST MICHIGAN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds Urban Tilth ↗
- Who funds CENTRO DEL OBRERO FRONTERIZO INC ↗
- Who funds WESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS EDUCATION PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Organizacion en California de Lideres Campesinas Inc ↗
- Who funds COMITE DE APOYO A LOS TRABAJADORES AGRICOLAS INC ↗
- Who funds DIY GIRLS ↗
- Who funds ONLY ONE INC ↗
- Who funds SOCIETY OF NATIVE NATIONS ↗
- Who funds COMING CLEAN INC ↗
- Who funds NEW LEGACY REENTRY CORP ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK CITY ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds Micronesia Climate Change Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds Citizens for a Sustainable Future ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE FOR COMMUNITY RECOVERY ↗
- Who funds SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds MOBILE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ACTION COALITION ↗
- Who funds New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Grassroots International Inc · Windward Fund · Movement Strategy Center · Solutions Project Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · NEO Philanthropy Inc · Common Counsel Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · A New Way of Life Reentry Project · Solidago Foundation · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Natural Resources Defense Council 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 Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc 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.
- Ironbound Community Corporation — 100% of income from government
- New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance — 39% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Clinton Hill Community Action Inc — 6% of income from government
- Fusion Partnership Inc — 3% of income from government
- Greenroots Inc — 1% of income from government
- Alianza Center Inc — 0% of income from government
- Rethink Energy Florida Inc — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc?
Find your warmest path to Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc 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.