· Public charity
The Delta Institute
Delta institute is a nonprofit that collaborates with communities to solve complex environmental challenges across the midwest.
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.
The 12 grants below total $913,214 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $974,974 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $61,760 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 · FY2025
- $10k–50k5 grants · $75k
- $50k–250k6 grants · $533k
- $250k+1 grant · $306k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CITY OF HOBART | $305,600 |
| BIG NFP | $107,500 |
| REGIMENT SECURITIES LLC | $100,000 |
| 389NM LLC | $99,680 |
| THE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC | $83,878 |
| COMPEER FINANCIAL FLCA | $75,000 |
| GRAEF-USA INC | $67,000 |
| CAPSTONE REALTY RESOURCES | $18,000 |
| SOIL HEALTH INSTITUTE | $16,937 |
| ILLINOIS INTERNATIONAL PORT DISTRICT | $15,000 |
| DAVEY RESOURCE GROUP | $14,619 |
| EPROPERTY INNOVATIONS LLC | $10,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 82% 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.
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 +175% since the first grant, against +54% for the ones you funded once.
22 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 4 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, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $200k 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 STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC2× · 2024–2025 · $136k · revenue +3%
- WIWINROCK INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT5× · 2019–2023 · $117k · revenue +29%
- CICROATAN INSTITUTE4× · 2018–2021 · $68k · revenue +374%
Funded once
- MCMUSKEGON COUNTY ROAD COMMISSIONone grant, 2018 · $150k
- CTCOMMUNITY TRANSITION PLANNINGone grant, 2018 · $71k
- CFCENTER FOR NEIGHBORHOOD TECHNOLOGYone grant, 2024 · $66k · revenue 0%
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.
When people, land, and community are as one, all three members prosper; when they relate not as members but as competing interests, all three are exploited. by consulting nature as the source and measure of that membership, the land…
The Illinois Sustainable Ag Partnership (ISAP) brings together diverse member organizations who work collaboratively to encourage the adoption of sustainable and profitable production practices that improve soil health and restore local…
Catalyze collaboration across perspectives, power, and systems for social equity and environmental health.
Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
This member-supported organization protects and restores iowa's land, water and wildlife for future generations. priorities include permanent land protection, promotion of improved land management and bringing new conservation…
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…
Support the development and enhancement of sustainable farming systems through farmer-to-farmer networking, innovation, demonstration, and education.
Conservation easement holder and long-term steward of wetland, stream, and species mitigation banks.
The land stewardship project (lsp) was organized on june 1, 1982, as a division of the national catholic rural life conference and in 1983 was incorporated under the minnesota (mn) nonprofit corporation act. lsp is supported primarily by…
Earth innovation institute works to advance climate-friendly rural devlopement through innovative approaches to sustainable farming, forestry and fisheries in tropical regions around the world.
The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Land Connection Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Liberty Prairie Nfp. 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 26 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.
29 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. 29 of the 67 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 THE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds WINROCK INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT ↗
- Who funds SOIL HEALTH INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds BIG NFP DBA Blacks in Green ↗
- Who funds CROATAN INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR NEIGHBORHOOD TECHNOLOGY ↗
- Who funds NATURAL LAND INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds SPENCE FARM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES ↗
- Who funds MUSKEGON RIVER WATERSHED ASSEMBLY ↗
- Who funds ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds BUILDING MATERIAL RE-USE ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
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: Windward Fund · Builders Vision Foundation · Walton Family Foundation Inc · The McKnight Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Patagoniaorg · United States Energy Foundation · Grand Victoria Foundation · The Lumpkin Family Foundation · The Energy Foundation · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · The Chicago Community Trust
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 Delta Institute 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.