· Public charity
Stroud Water Research Center
To advance knowledge of stream and river ecosystems through interdisciplinary research, to develop & communicate new ecological ideas, to provide solutions for water resource problems worldwide, and to promote public understanding of freshwater ecology through educational programs, watershed restoration, conservation leadership and…
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2020.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 12 grants below total $327,577 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $416,554 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $88,977 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 · FY2020
- Under $10k5 grants · $32k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $117k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $178k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| AZAVEA | $108,110 |
| Individual grant recipient | $69,967 |
| COVER CROP COACHING LLC | $44,206 |
| ROSETREE CONSULTING | $23,000 |
| TWO ROADS CONSULTING CORP | $20,000 |
| THE ACADEMY OF NATURAL SCIENCES OF DREXEL UNIVERSITY | $17,448 |
| PENNSYLVANIA ASSOCIATION OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE | $12,626 |
| BERKS COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT | $7,626 |
| PA ASSOCIATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATORS INC | $7,500 |
| MILLERSVILLE UNIVERSITY | $6,227 |
| CHESTER COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT | $5,805 |
| PENNSYLVANIA NO TILL ALLIANCE | $5,062 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–20) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 68% of your 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.
Grants abroad, by region — $175k on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: TO SUPPORT TROPICAL RESEARCH PROGRAMS
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 +35% since the first grant, against +9% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2020, 0 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (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 FY2020, 71% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $96k 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
- AIAzavea Inc2× · 2019–2020 · $196k
- CCCOVER CROP COACHING LLC2× · 2019–2020 · $100k
- PNPENNSYLVANIA NO-TILL ALLIANCE2× · 2019–2020 · $52k · revenue +35%
Funded once
- USUTAH STATE UNIVERSITYone grant, 2019 · $51k
- LTLIMNO TECHone grant, 2019 · $25k
- UOUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTONone grant, 2019 · $14k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
4 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. 4 of the 14 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
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.
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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Open a dossier: National Fish and Wildlife 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 Stroud Water Research Center 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.
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.