Skip to content
Society of American Foresters at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Society of American Foresters

The mission of the SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS is to advance sustainable management of forest resources through science, education, and technology, promoting professional excellence while ensuring the continued health, integrity, and use of forests to benefit society in perpetuity.

$117k
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$8k
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 2024.

Environment$307k
02FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $34,780, the rows itemized in this filing. The $117,037 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $82,257 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.
$5,280
Median grant
6
States reached
$27M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
APPALACHIAN SAF$7,600
WISCONSIN SAF$6,800
WASHINGTON SAF$5,280
NEW ENGLAND SAF$5,100
OREGON SAF$5,000
DAKOTAS SAF$5,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 72% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%INTERMOUNTAIN SAF: $11k → 8%MINNESOTA SAF: $7k → 17%MONTANA SAF: $6k → 11%ALLEGHENY SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS: $7k → 6%SOUTHWESTERN SAF: $12k → 14%APPALACHIAN SAF: $13k → 11%WISCONSIN SAF: $8k → 6%WISCONSIN SAF: $13k → 14%OREGON SAF: $5k → 11%OREGON SAF: $7k → 15%APPALACHIAN SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS: $14k → 12%APPALACHIAN SAF: $6k → 19%COLORADOWYOMING SAF: $13k → 7%OHIO SAF: $6k → 15%WASHINGTON SAF: $5k → 18%MISSISSIPPI SAF: $8k → 23%APPALACHIAN SAF: $8k → 7%VIRGINIA TECH: $5k → 21%DAKOTAS SAF: $5k → 11%DAKOTAS SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS: $6k → 14%NEW ENGLAND SAF: $8k → 10%ALLEGHENY SAF: $10k → 18%WISCONSIN SAF: $8k → 14%OREGON SAF: $5k → 15%APPALACHIAN SAF: $11k → 12%MISSISSIPPI SAF: $5k → 23%APPALACHIAN SAF: $7k → 7%DAKOTAS SAF: $5k → 14%NEW ENGLAND SAF: $6k → 10%ALLEGHENY SAF: $5k → 18%WISCONSIN SAF: $7k → 14%APPALACHIAN SAF: $10k → 12%NEW ENGLAND SAF: $5k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

VT
WA
ID
MT
MN
WI
OR
SD
OH
PA
CO
VA
MD
NM
NC
SC
DC
MS
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 10% of Society of American Foresters’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Society of American Foresterslessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

66%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$200k · 8 repeat orgs$102k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
8

Total granted

$200k
$102k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+35%
+36%

Still filing today

63%
13%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time
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

  • AS
    Allegheny Society of American Foresters
    3× · 2018–2020 · $23k · revenue +35%
  • NE
    NEW ENGLAND SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS
    3× · 2021–2024 · $19k · revenue +127%
  • SO
    SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS
    2× · 2019–2024 · $13k · revenue +93%

Funded once

  • SF
    SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY INITIATIVE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $40k · revenue +36%
  • SO
    SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS
    one grant, 2022 · $13k
  • SO
    SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS
    one grant, 2021 · $12k
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
05the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 17 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
5/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Appalachian Society of American Forester: $62,522 · OtherAppalachian Society of American ForesterSOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS: $36,849 · OtherSOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERSAllegheny Society of American Foresters: $22,595 · OtherAllegheny Society of American ForestersNEW ENGLAND SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS: $19,450 · OtherNEW ENGLAND SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERSOregon Society of American Foresters: $16,923 · OtherOregon Society of American ForestersSOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS: $15,829 · OtherSOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERSMISSISSIPPI SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FOR ESTERS: $13,225 · OtherSOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS: $12,704 · OtherSOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS: $12,531 · OtherSOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS: $12,000 · OtherSOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS: $11,325 · Other+4 more: $25,592 · Other+4 moreSUSTAINABLE FORESTRY INITIATIVE INC: $40,000 · EnvironmentSUSTAINABLE FO…VIRGINIA TECH FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 · Education
Other$261,545Environment$40,000Education$5,000

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 budgetAppalachian Society of American Forester: $62,522 over 6y, 4.3% of budgetSUSTAINABLE FORESTRY INITIATIVE INC: $40,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetNEW ENGLAND SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS: $19,450 over 3y, 12% of budgetOregon Society of American Foresters: $16,923 over 3y, 8.6% of budgetSOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS: $12,531 over 2y, 5.3% of budgetVIRGINIA TECH FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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 Appalachian Society of American Forester ↗
  • Who funds SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY INITIATIVE INC ↗
  • Who funds Allegheny Society of American Foresters ↗
  • Who funds NEW ENGLAND SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS ↗
  • Who funds Oregon Society of American Foresters ↗
  • Who funds SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS ↗
  • Who funds VIRGINIA TECH FOUNDATION INC ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Society of American Foresters funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Society of American Foresters. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 12%
  • Oregon Society of American Foresters: 12% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 17 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Society of American Foresters’ 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