· Private foundation
The Elmo 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 $10k16 grants · $87k
- $10k–50k34 grants · $527k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CHARLOTTESVILLE HABITAT FOR HUMANIT | $50,000 |
| CHARLOTTESVILLE HIGH SCHOOL | $45,000 |
| CHESPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK | $40,000 |
| CHARLOTTESVILLE FREE CLINIC | $25,000 |
| VIRGINIA ORGANIZING | $25,000 |
| ECOADDENDUM | $22,000 |
| EVERGREEN COLLABORATIVE | $20,000 |
| STRONGMINDS INC | $20,000 |
| CLEAN WISCONSIN | $20,000 |
| COMMUNITY CLIMATE COLLABORATIVE | $16,000 |
| SUSTAINABLE HARVEST INC | $15,000 |
| MICHIGAN CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK | $15,000 |
| BUILD CHANGE | $15,000 |
| ANAI INC | $15,000 |
| RAINFOREST ACTION NETWORK | $15,000 |
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 (FY20–25, $46k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 10% of The Elmo Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +42% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
82 repeat relationships — 38 still active in FY2025, 44 since wound down; 12 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, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $97k 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
- CFCHARLOTTESVILLE FREE CLINIC7× · 2017–2025 · $250k · revenue +5%
- PCPIEDMONT CASA INC9× · 2017–2025 · $170k · revenue +114%
- SISTRONGMINDS INC8× · 2017–2025 · $160k · revenue +375%
Funded once
- PNPOSSIBLE NYAYA HEALTHone grant, 2021 · $25k
EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVEone grant, 2021 · $20k · revenue -40%- MCMICHIGAN CLINICIANS FOR CLIMATE ACTone grant, 2021 · $20k
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.
Climate catalyst sparks collective action to tackle the biggest climate challenges we face today: cutting emissions in heavy industries.
Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.
To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.
Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.
E3g is a leading international not-for-profit think tank specialising in climate diplomacy harnessing expertise in the politics and economics of climate change.
To launch breakthrough climate mitigation efforts by identifying, supporting, and unleashing innovative leaders with transformative strategies.
CRI is an international climate and human rights monitoring and advocacy organization dedicated to preventing climate change and human rights abuses.
To empower frontline communities to lead nature-based solutions that advance climate justice, ecosystem restoration, and resilient livelihoods through connecting locally-led initiatives to funding, markets, and technical support.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Environment next supports individuals, nonprofits and businesses around the world on solutions to complex climate issues. we provide leadership, outreach and communication support, grants, and investments to empower leaders and their ideas…
Cgc operates as a nonprofit financial institution that invests directly and through partners to transform financial markets by using public and private investing to accelerate the deployment of projects that strengthen the grid, reduce…
To accelerate progress in interventions that harness Earths natural systems to stabilize the climate.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Goodpower Education Fund Inc and the most unlike its peers is Inga Foundation. 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 21 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% 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.
85 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. 85 of the 132 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 CHARLOTTESVILLE FREE CLINIC ↗
- Who funds VIRGINIA ORGANIZING INC ↗
- Who funds PIEDMONT CASA INC ↗
- Who funds STRONGMINDS INC ↗
- Who funds SCHOOL JUSTICE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds NYAYA HEALTH ↗
- Who funds BUILD CHANGE ↗
- Who funds LAST MILE HEALTH ↗
- Who funds VIRGINIA TECH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ECOADDENDUM INC ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds OPEN CITY ADVOCATES ↗
- Who funds THE WOMEN'S INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds Evangelical Environmental Network ↗
- Who funds CHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds ANAI INC ↗
- Who funds CLEAN WISCONSIN INC ↗
- Who funds US CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK ↗
- Who funds CITIZENS CLIMATE EDUCATION CORP ↗
- Who funds YOUTH SENTENCING & REENTRY PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds The Coalition of Immokalee Workers Inc ↗
- Who funds Dogwood Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds THE HAVEN INC ↗
- Who funds Michigan Climate Action Network ↗
- Who funds RAINFOREST FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds EVERGREEN COLLABORATIVE ↗
- Who funds Nature Forward ↗
- Who funds BUILDING GOODNESS 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: The Oak Hill Fund · Charlottesville Area Community Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · Patagoniaorg · The Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation · Paul Bechtner Foundation · The J & E Berkley Foundation · Greater Washington Community Foundation · Westwind Foundation · The Energy Foundation · The Partnership Project Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc
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 Elmo 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Rock Creek Conservancy Inc — 60% of income from government
- Nature Forward — 32% of income from government
- Elakha Alliance — 10% of income from government
- Project Medishare for Haiti Inc — 0% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 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.