Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Ga Binney Conservation Foundation Trust

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$27k
Granted FY2023
5
Grants FY2023
5
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202023.

Environment$50kAnimals$37kHousing & Shelter$15kEducation$15kHealth$2k
02FY2023 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k4 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
$5,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$637k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
YALE UNIVERSITY DIVINITY SCHOOL LIBRARY$15,000
JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE$5,000
ORANGUTAN FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL$5,000
INCLINE VILLAGE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION$1,000
SAVE THE SENIC SANTA RITAS$1,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 71% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%SAVE THE SENIC SANTA RITAS: $5k → 15%FRIENDS OF THE WEST SHORE: $2k → 6%MAP - MOUNTAIN AREA PRESERVATION: $5k → 11%ORANGUTAN FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL: $5k → 14%JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE: $10k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $15k → 10%WILD RIVERS LAND TRUST: $500 → 14%NIVAS: $10k → 12%NORTH TAHOE PRESERVATION ALLIANCE: $5k → 10%SAVE THE SENIC SANTA RITAS: $1k → 15%ORANGUTAN FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL: $5k → 14%JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE: $5k → 14%NIVAS: $5k → 12%INCLINE VILLAGE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $1k → 10%CEDO: $5k → 15%ORANGUTAN FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL: $5k → 14%BONOBO CONSERVATION INITIATIVE: $1k → 14%INCLINE VILLAGE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $1k → 10%CEDO - INTERCULTURAL CENTER: $1k → 15%ORANGUTAN FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL: $1k → 14%ARIZONA LAND AND WATER TRUST: $5k → 15%ARIZONA LAND AND WATER TRUST: $5k → 15%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

WI
OR
NV
CT
CA
CO
AZ
DC

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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 48% of The Ga Binney Conservation Foundation Trust’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.

The Ga Binney Conservation Foundation Trustlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 13% directed abroad (not shown)

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

58%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$69k · 6 repeat orgs$50k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +127% since the first grant, against -76% for the ones you funded once.

6 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2023, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
8

Total granted

$69k
$35k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+127%
-76%

Still filing today

100%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 44% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’20’21’22’23
EnvironmentAnimalsInternationalEducationHealthOther

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

  • JG
    JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION
    3× · 2021–2023 · $20k · revenue +34%
  • OF
    ORANGUTAN FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL
    4× · 2020–2023 · $16k · revenue +6%
  • NI
    NIVAS INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $15k · revenue +127%

Funded once

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue -48%
  • NT
    NORTH TAHOE PRESERVATION ALLIANCE INC
    one grant, 2021 · $5k
  • MM
    MAP - MOUNTAIN AREA PRESERVATION
    one grant, 2022 · $5k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
2
Oregon Agricultural Trust

Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.

Environment
3
Wildlife Conservation Global Inc

Wildlife conservation global, inc. operates the okapi conservation project (ocp) which works in the democratic republic of the congo with the institute in congo for the conservation of nature (iccn) and local communities throughout the…

Animals
4
Sierra Watch

Sierra watch secures conservation outcomes to protect the natural resources, mountain communities, and timeless values of the tahoe sierra.

Environment
5
Western Rivers Conservancy

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…

Environment
6
International Wildlife Trust

Iwt is committed to combatting both the causes and effects of illegal wildlife trafficking by focusing on transnational organized crime groups who have escaped the consequences of their criminal activities to date.

Animals
7
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
8
McKenzie River Trust

Acquire and manage land and conservation easements through purchase and donation to ensure long term conservation of clean water, fish and wildlife habitat, and other community values.

Environment
9
Cascadia Wildlands

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…

Environment
10
Avian Research & Conservation Institute Inc

To engage in wildlife research and conservation in the public interest; to manage, preserve, and restore plant and animal species; to make research results available to the public for their use and education; to implement research, analyze…

Environment
11
Oregon Natural Resources Council Fund Oregon Wild

Oregon Wild works to protect and restore Oregon's wildlands, wildlife and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations.

Environment
12
Cowiche Canyon Conservancy

Protecting our shrub-steppe and connecting people to this vanishing landscape.

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Arizona Land and Water Trust Inc and the most unlike its peers is Save the Scenic Santa Ritas. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

9 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 15 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

ORANGUTAN FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL — $16,000 · OtherORANGUTAN FOUNDATION INTERNATIONALYALE UNIVERSITY DIVINITY SCHOOL LIBRARY — $15,000 · OtherYALE UNIVERSITY DIVINITY SCHOOL LIBRARYNORTH TAHOE PRESERVATION ALLIANCE INC — $5,000 · OtherNORTH TAHOE PRESERVATION ALLIANCE INCMAP - MOUNTAIN AREA PRESERVATION — $5,000 · OtherMAP - MOUNTAIN AREA PRESERVATIONCEDO — $5,000 · OtherCEDOFRIENDS OF THE WEST SHORE — $2,000 · Other+1 more — $1,000 · OtherJANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION — $20,000 · AnimalsJANE GOODALL INSTITU…BONOBO CONSERVATION INITIATIVE — $1,000 · AnimalsARIZONA LAND AND WATER TRUST INC — $10,000 · EnvironmentARIZONA LAND AN…Save the Scenic Santa Ritas — $6,000 · EnvironmentSave the Scenic…+1 more — $500 · EnvironmentUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION — $15,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF …NIVAS INC — $15,000 · InternationalNIVAS INCINCLINE VILLAGE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION — $2,000 · Health
Other$49,000Animals$21,000Environment$16,500Education$15,000International$15,000Health$2,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetJANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION — $20,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetORANGUTAN FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL — $16,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION — $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNIVAS INC — $15,000 over 2y, 7.1% of budgetARIZONA LAND AND WATER TRUST INC — $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSave the Scenic Santa Ritas — $6,000 over 2y, 4.4% of budgetINCLINE VILLAGE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION — $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBONOBO CONSERVATION INITIATIVE — $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWILD RIVERS LAND TRUST — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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 tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

National Philanthropic TrustPA7.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Ga Binney Conservation Foundation Trust 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 15 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record but names no grant recipient in the published copy, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph