· Private foundation
Steven C Leuthold Family Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k20 grants · $113k
- $10k–50k53 grants · $1.0M
- $50k–250k10 grants · $838k
- $250k+1 grant · $1.0M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| AMERICAN SONG BIRD MGMT AND RECOVERY | $1,000,000 |
| CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY | $150,000 |
| SALUDA COMMUNITY LAND TRUST | $145,000 |
| KEWEENAW LAND TRUST | $85,000 |
| FRIENDS OF SAX-ZIMM BOG | $80,000 |
| CONSERVING CAROLINA | $75,000 |
| UNIQUE PLACES TO SAVE | $73,000 |
| WILDERNESS LAND TRUST | $70,000 |
| GLEN CANYON INSTITUTE | $60,000 |
| SOUTHERN APPALACHIEN HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY | $50,000 |
| BLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCY | $50,000 |
| FRIENDS OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER | $45,000 |
| KEWEENAW LAND TRUST | $42,000 |
| SNOWDON WILDLIFE SANCTUARY | $41,000 |
| ANIMAL OUTLOOK | $40,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $557k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 56% 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
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.
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 +53% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.
206 repeat relationships — 59 still active in FY2025, 147 since wound down; 24 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.3M 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
- CFCENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC9× · 2017–2025 · $787k · revenue +127%
- HLHighlands-Cashiers Land Trust Inc3× · 2023–2025 · $595k · revenue +128% · 33% of their budget
- FOFRIENDS OF SAX-ZIM BOG9× · 2017–2025 · $477k · revenue +671% · 36% of their budget
Funded once
- EEARTHJUSTICEone grant, 2017 · $55k
- CFCONSERVATION FUNDone grant, 2024 · $35k
- OCOHIO CANYON INSTITUTEone grant, 2019 · $32k
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.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…
Icl's mission is to create a conservation community and pragmatic, enduring solutions that protect and restore the air you breathe, the water you drink, and the land and wildlife you love.
Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…
The mission of the montana land reliance (mlr) is to partner with landowners to provide permanent protection for private lands that are significant for agricultural production, fish and wildlife habitat, and open space.
Preserving and enhancing the habitat of wildlife, such as sandhill cranes, waterfowl, raptors, which habitat expenses are supported by agricultural activities.
The montana wildlife federation is a statewide conservation organization dedicated to protecting wildlife, wildlife habitat, and public access for outdoor recreation.
Connect conservationists and supporters, deploy resources to the field, provide conservationists with tools and support they need to succeed.
Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…
The wildlands trust works throughout southeastern massachusetts to conserve and permanently protect native habitats, farmland, and lands of high ecologic and scenic value that serve to keep our communities healthy and our residents…
Rocky mountain wild works to protect, connect, and restore wildlife and wild lands in the southern rocky mountain region. we work to secure the biodiversity of the mountains, plains, and desert ecosystems of colorado, wyoming, utah, and…
Greater yellowstone coalition works with all people to protect the lands, waters, and wildlife of the greater yellowstone ecosystem, now and for future generations.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Arizona Land and Water Trust Inc and the most unlike its peers is Houghton County Historical Society. 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 31 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) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.6% 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.
160 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. 160 of the 297 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 CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds KEWEENAW COMMUNITY FOREST COMPANY ↗
- Who funds Highlands-Cashiers Land Trust Inc ↗
- Who funds KEWEENAW LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF SAX-ZIM BOG ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds HUMANE FARMING ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds PAYETTE LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds GLEN CANYON INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds EL RIO FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds WESTERN WATERSHEDS PROJECTS INC ↗
- Who funds SNOWDON WILDLIFE SANCTUARY ↗
- Who funds IDAHO FOODBANK WAREHOUSE ↗
- Who funds Community Food Bank Inc ↗
- Who funds FAMILY CARE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WILDEARTH GUARDIANS ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE WORLD FOOD PROGRAM INC ↗
- Who funds SALUDA COMMUNITY LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds MINNESOTA CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCACY ↗
- Who funds GREENPEACE INC ↗
- Who funds Save the Scenic Santa Ritas ↗
- Who funds Conserving Carolina ↗
- Who funds THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD ARIZONA INC ↗
- Who funds IDAHO YOUTH RANCH INC ↗
- Who funds Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection ↗
- Who funds PETS FOR THE ELDERLY FOUNDATION ↗
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: Community Foundation for Southern Arizona · The Nature Conservancy · The Minneapolis Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Longview Foundation · Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation · Conservation Trust for North Carolina · The McKnight Foundation · Margaret a Cargill Foundation · Ch Robinson Worldwide Foundation · EcoTrust · Pohlad Family Foundation
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 Steven C Leuthold Family Foundation 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.
- Northeast Wilderness Trust Corporation — 2% 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 Steven C Leuthold Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Steven C Leuthold Family Foundation 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.