· Private foundation
Temper of the Times Foundation Inc
Its FY2024 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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k19 grants · $23k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $25k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GLEN CANYON INSTITUTE | $15,000 |
| DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $8,500 |
| WYOMING WILDLIFE FEDERATION | $6,000 |
| NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY DBA AUDUBON FLORIDA | $3,500 |
| FRIENDS OF VIRGIN ISLANDS NATIONAL PARK (VINP) | $1,000 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVANCY BLOCK ISLAND | $1,000 |
| BOSTON UNIVERSITY | $500 |
| AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION (ACLU) | $500 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS USA | $500 |
| THE CARTER CENTER | $100 |
| PETRESCUE | $100 |
| NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION | $100 |
| WNYC NEW YORK PUBLIC RADIO | $100 |
| NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION (NPCA) | $100 |
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 39% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
13 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 19 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, 1% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $47k 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
- TSThe Society for Ecological Restoration Inc2× · 2018–2020 · $15k · revenue +384%
- CFCLARK FORK COALITION2× · 2018–2019 · $8k · revenue +3%
MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC2× · 2023–2024 · $2k · revenue +1%
Funded once
- UOUNIVERSITY OF MONTANAone grant, 2017 · $30k
- WPWHITEBARK PINE ECOSYSTEM FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · $13k · revenue -30%
- ACALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION ON TOXICSgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $11k · revenue +147%
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.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
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.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
The mission of wildcoast is to conserve coastal and marine ecosystems and address climate change through natural solutions. our staff is dedicated to conserving threatened and endangered coastlines and wildlife in california and mexico.…
Western rivers conservancy's mission is to protect outstanding river ecosystems in the western united states. continued on schedule o.we acquire land to conserve critical habitat, provide public access for compatible use and enjoyment, and…
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…
Greater yellowstone coalition works with all people to protect the lands, waters, and wildlife of the greater yellowstone ecosystem, now and for future generations.
Support ecosystem-based wildlife management by increasing public awareness of wildlife issues, responding to information requests, advocating for science-based wildlife habitat management through proposal and comment submissions, and…
The California Wilderness Coalition protects the natural landscapes that make California unique, providing clean air and water, a home to wildlife, and a place for recreation and spiritual renewal.
Connect conservationists and supporters, deploy resources to the field, provide conservationists with tools and support they need to succeed.
Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Park Foundation and the most unlike its peers is New York Public Radio. 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 41 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
51 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. 51 of the 70 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.
- Who funds Eyak Preservation Council dba Cultural Defense Fund ↗
- Who funds COOK INLETKEEPER ↗
- Who funds BLOCK ISLAND CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds The Society for Ecological Restoration Inc ↗
- Who funds GLEN CANYON INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds TURTLE ISLAND RESTORATION NETWORK ↗
- Who funds WHITEBARK PINE ECOSYSTEM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION ON TOXICS ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS NATIONAL PARK INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds Cornell University ↗
- Who funds Defenders of Wildlife ↗
- Who funds WYOMING OUTDOOR COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds CLARK FORK COALITION ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE CONSERVATION DBA CENTER FOR LARGE LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF CEDAR MESA ↗
- Who funds WOODLANDS CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds THE GRAND CANYON TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds WILLAMETTE PARTNERSHIP ↗
- Who funds Marine Mammals of Maine ↗
- Who funds WYOMING WILDLIFE FEDERATION ↗
- Who funds OTSEGO COUNTY CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds BLACKFOOT CHALLENGE INC ↗
- Who funds Wild Earth Society Incorporated ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds RESOURCE MEDIA ↗
- Who funds Reef Relief Inc ↗
- Who funds RE SOURCES ↗
- Who funds American Forests ↗
- Who funds SAVE THE SOUND ↗
- Who funds THE INTERNATIONAL WILDLIFE COEXISTENCE NETWORK INC ↗
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: Patagoniaorg · Resources Legacy Fund · Wilburforce Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Mwc Foundation Inc #0726315 · The New-Land Foundation Inc · The Wilderness Society · The Bullitt Foundation · Clif Family Foundation · The Pew Charitable Trusts · Harder 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 Temper of the Times Foundation 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.
- Willamette Partnership — 76% of income from government
- Save the Sound — 37% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% 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 Temper of the Times Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Temper of the Times Foundation 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.