Skip to content
The Good Growth Alliance at a glance

· Public charity

The Good Growth Alliance

THE GOOD GROWTH ALLIANCE works collaboratively with partners in the public and private sectors to engage in consumer education and advocacy related to the promotion of greenspaces and gardening (indoor and outdoor).

$880k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$800k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Environment$4.1MPhilanthropy$1.5MCivil Rights$749kPublic Benefit$483kHealth$222k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
  • $250k+1 grant · $800k
$50,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$34k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE SCOTTS MIRACLE-GRO FOUNDATION$800,000
COALITION TO REGULATE MARIJUANA LIKE ALCOHOL$50,000
NEW JERSEY PARTICIPATION PROJECT$25,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY20–20, $40k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%COMMUNITY VOICES HEARD POWER: $40k → 17%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
04

Where the work is directed

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

About 76% of The Good Growth Alliance’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Good Growth Alliancelessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.9M · 3 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +7200% since the first grant, against +27% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
10

Total granted

$5.9M
$1.0M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+7200%
+27%

Still filing today

67%
70%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $75k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
Civil RightsPhilanthropyHuman ServicesEducationOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • TS
    THE SCOTTS MIRACLE-GRO FOUNDATION
    6× · 2019–2024 · $5.6M · revenue ×73 · 58% of their budget
  • TP
    TEXAS PATIENTS FIRST FOUNDATION
    2× · 2022–2023 · $222k
  • LI
    LONG ISLAND PROGRESSIVE COALITION INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $131k · revenue +19%

Funded once

  • CE
    CANNABIS ECONOMIC EQUALITY COALITION
    one grant, 2022 · $300k
  • FT
    FAIR TRADE AND EQUITY IN CANNABIS INC
    one grant, 2022 · $275k
  • NA
    NEW APPROACH ADVOCACY FUND
    one grant, 2021 · $150k · revenue -65%
How this is measured

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

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
New Jersey Policy Perspective

New Jersey Policy Perspective (NJPP) is a nonpartisan think tank that drives policy change to advance economic, social, and racial justice through evidence-based, independent research, analysis, and strategic communications.

Arts & Culture
2
The New American Populist

To empower citizens and encourage greater involvement in the government process

Human Services
3
Yes On National Popular Vote

Support "yes" vote on referendum dealing with national popular vote

—
4
Criminal Justice Policy Foundation
—
5
Global Policy Forum Inc

Research and education of United Nations activities

International
6
Latino Political Network
—
7
New Approach Montana

New Approach Montana is a registered Montana ballot question committee in support of two 2020 ballot initiatives for the legalization of marijuana for adults 21 and older.

—
8
Marijuana Policy Project Foundation

To distribute educational information to the public about marijuana by increasing, identifying, and activating supporters of non-punitive, non-coercive marijuana policies.

Philanthropy
9
Glasshouse Policy

Glasshouse Policy removes the gap between citizens and policymakers, creating a more engaged citizenry and a more responsive and representative government.

—
10
Climate Parliament Inc

Researching policy ideas on climate and clean energy in India, engaging legislators and business leaders to discuss those ideas.

International
11
People's Independent Commission

Supports Measure to Remove Lawmakers Power to Set Their Own Pay

—
12
National Legal Advocacy Network Dba Glow

The National Legal Advocacy Network d/b/a Grassroots Law & Organizing for Workers is a legal non-profit organization dedicated to using legal strategies as a tool to build power for marginalized workers and create systemic change through…

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Drug Policy Action; the most unlike its peers is The Scotts Miracle-Gro Foundation. 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

10 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 15 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE SCOTTS MIRACLE-GRO FOUNDATION: $5,587,780 · PhilanthropyTHE SCOTTS MIRACLE-GRO FOUNDATIONCANNABIS ECONOMIC EQUALITY COALITION: $300,000 · OtherCANNABIS ECONOMIC E…FAIR TRADE AND EQUITY IN CANNABIS INC: $275,000 · OtherFAIR TRADE AND EQUI…TEXAS PATIENTS FIRST FOUNDATION: $222,400 · OtherTEXAS PATIENTS FIRS…NEW APPROACH ADVOCACY FUND: $150,000 · OtherNEW APPROACH ADVOCA…LONG ISLAND PROGRESSIVE COALITION INC: $131,000 · OtherLONG ISLAND PROGRES…COALITION TO REGULATE MARIJUANA LIKE ALCOHOL: $50,000 · Other+4 more: $92,500 · Other+4 moreMARIJUANA POLICY PROJECT: $127,500 · Civil RightsDRUG POLICY ACTION: $15,000 · Civil RightsConference of Western Attorneys General AG Alliance: $50,000 · EducationCommunity Voices Heard Power Inc: $40,000 · Human Services
Philanthropy$5,587,780Other$1,220,900Civil Rights$142,500Education$50,000Human Services$40,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE SCOTTS MIRACLE-GRO FOUNDATION: $5,587,780 over 6y, 58% of budgetNEW APPROACH ADVOCACY FUND: $150,000 over 1y, 4.8% of budgetLONG ISLAND PROGRESSIVE COALITION INC: $131,000 over 2y, 19% of budgetMARIJUANA POLICY PROJECT: $127,500 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetConference of Western Attorneys General AG Alliance: $50,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCommunity Voices Heard Power Inc: $40,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetGOPAC EDUCATION FUND INC: $25,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetNew Jersey Participation Project Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 27% of budgetNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR WOMEN LEGISLATORS INC: $17,500 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetDRUG POLICY ACTION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Good Growth Alliance funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Good Growth Alliance. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Good Growth Alliance?

    Find your warmest path to The Good Growth Alliance 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 15 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Good Growth Alliance’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home