· Private foundation
The Ark Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
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 $10k28 grants · $101k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $25k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| AH HAA SCHOOL FOR THE ARTS | $15,000 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS USA | $10,400 |
| TARIRO | $8,000 |
| WILD EARTH GUARDIANS | $7,000 |
| WEEHAWKEN CREATIVE ARTS | $6,400 |
| ESPERANZA SHELTER | $5,280 |
| NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS | $5,280 |
| IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER | $5,280 |
| PARTNERSHIP WITH NATIVE AMERICANS | $5,280 |
| NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION | $5,280 |
| SECOND CHANCE HUMANE SOCIETY | $5,000 |
| CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY | $5,000 |
| EARTH JUSTICE | $4,500 |
| WORLD FOOD PROGRAM | $4,000 |
| GERARD'S HOUSE | $3,000 |
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, $82k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% 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 +64% since the first grant, against +49% for the ones you funded once.
50 repeat relationships — 25 still active in FY2025, 25 since wound down; 5 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, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $24k 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
- CCCreate Center for the Arts7× · 2017–2023 · $176k · revenue +181% · 35% of their budget
MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC7× · 2019–2025 · $48k · revenue +79%
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC6× · 2017–2022 · $42k · revenue +41%
Funded once
- EVEFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUNDATION USA INCgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $13k · revenue +36%
- BSBosque Schoolone grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +16%
- IRINTERNATIONAL RELIEF TEAMSgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +34%
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.
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.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.
Cuenca los ojos works to preserve and restore the biodiversity of the us/mexican borderlands through land protection, habitat restoration and wildlife reintroduction.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.
Bold futures nm leads policy change, research, place-based organizing, and culture shift by and for women and people of color in new mexico. bold futures nm centers the lived experiences and expertise of those most impacted by an issue,…
Connect conservationists and supporters, deploy resources to the field, provide conservationists with tools and support they need to succeed.
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Center for the Rights of Abused Children and the most unlike its peers is Kindred Spirit. 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 35 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 — 3% 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.
68 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. 68 of the 80 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 Create Center for the Arts ↗
- Who funds WILDEARTH GUARDIANS ↗
- Who funds AH HAA SCHOOL FOR THE ARTS ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds REUNITY RESOURCES ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds THE ALBUQUERQUE CENTER FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds Defenders of Wildlife ↗
- Who funds THE CAMPHILL SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds GERARD'S HOUSE ↗
- Who funds CONTIGO IMMIGRANT JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds LAS CUMBRES COMMUNITY SERVICES ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL PURPOSE GROUP ↗
- Who funds Esperanza Shelter Inc ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds Partnership With Native Americans ↗
- Who funds EFFECTIVE VENTURES FOUNDATION USA INC ↗
- Who funds HANDICAP INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds SANTA FE CONSERVATION TRUST ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE WORLD FOOD PROGRAM INC ↗
- Who funds SANTA FE FARMERS MARKET INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS IN EDUCATION FOR THE SANTA FE PUBLIC SCHOOLS ↗
- Who funds INTERFAITH COMMUNITY SHELTER GROUP INC ↗
- Who funds BEST CHANCE ↗
- Who funds ALBUQUERQUE HEALTH CARE FOR THE HOMELESS INC ↗
- Who funds Little Earth School Inc ↗
- Who funds OXFAM-AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds SEA SHEPHERD CONSERVATION SOCIETY ↗
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: Santa Fe Community Foundation · The Frost Foundation · St Vincent Hospital · Nancy Ann Mellen Foundation · Anchorum St Vincent · New Mexico Community Foundation · Lannan Foundation · Thornburg Foundation · Marshall L and Perrine D McCune Charitable Foundation Inc · Battelle Memorial Institute · Feinberg Foundation · Brindle 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 The Ark 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.
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Transition Projects Inc — 29% of income from government
- Native American Youth and Family Center — 23% of income from government
- Oxfam-America 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 The Ark Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Ark 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.