Skip to content
The Grand Canyon Trust Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

The Grand Canyon Trust Inc

The mission of the grand canyon trust is to safeguard the wonders of the grand canyon and the colorado plateau, while supporting the rights of its native peoples.

$61k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$42k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Community Improvement$1.4MCivil Rights$300kEnvironment$214kEducation$31kFood & Nutrition$6k
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $54,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $60,952 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $6,952 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$42,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$73M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY$42,000
AMERICAN RIVERS$12,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%CHANGE LABS INC: $1.2M → 16%CHANGE LABS: $200k → 26%RESOURCES LEGACY FUND: $50k → 12%THE WILDLANDS CONSERVANCY: $50k → 14%SOCIAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEUR: $22k → 14%FOUR CORNERS RISING: $10k → 14%NEW VENTURE FUND: $23k → 14%FOODCORPS INC: $6k → 12%UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY: $42k → 12%NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUNDS: $300k → 12%CHANGE LABS INC: $8k → 16%RESOURCES LEGACY FUND: $25k → 12%AMERICAN RIVERS: $12k → 14%UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY: $37k → 12%NAU FOUNDATION: $15k → 16%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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.6M · 4 repeat orgs$421k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +4586% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
7

Total granted

$1.6M
$409k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+4586%
+13%

Still filing today

50%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $12k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentCommunity ImprovementCivil RightsFood & NutritionEducationOther
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

  • CL
    CHANGE LABS
    3× · 2019–2021 · $1.4M · revenue ×47
  • US
    UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2024–2025 · $79k
  • RL
    RESOURCES LEGACY FUND
    2× · 2018–2021 · $75k · revenue +48%

Funded once

  • NA
    NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC
    one grant, 2017 · $300k · revenue -20%
  • TW
    The Wildlands Conservancy
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +13%
  • SA
    SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $22k · revenue +345%
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
National Forest Foundation

The national forest foundation (nff), chartered by congress, turns america's love of nature into meaningful action for 193-million acre national forest system through on the ground program work and grant making activities, and accepts and…

Recreation & Sports
2
Rainforest Foundation Inc

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.

Environment
3
Nature for Justice

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.

Environment
4
American Forests

Protection and expansion of threatened urban and wildland forest ecosystems. See Part III

Environment
5
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.

Animals
6
Western Resource Advocates

Western Resource Advocates (WRA) is a regional nonprofit advocacy organization fighting climate change and its impacts to sustain the environment, economy, and people of the West. As the region's go-to experts for more than three decades,…

Crime & Legal
7
Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians

The affiliated tribes of northwest indians is founded on the principles of unity and cooperation among indian governments and people.

—
8
Nature and Culture International

Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.

Environment
9
The Grand Canyon Trust Inc

The mission of the grand canyon trust is to safeguard the wonders of the grand canyon and the colorado plateau, while supporting the rights of its native peoples.

Environment
10
National Association of Clean Water Agencies

Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.

—
11
CalWild

The California Wilderness Coalition protects the natural landscapes that make California unique, providing clean air and water, a home to wildlife, and a place for recreation and spiritual renewal.

—
12
Native Americans in Philanthropy

Native Americans in Philanthropy advocates, educates, convenes and innovates to dramatically increase philanthropic investments in Native communities and transform the philanthropic sector's relationship with Indigenous communities.

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc; the most unlike its peers is Native American Rights Fund Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

11 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. 11 of the 13 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
9/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHANGE LABS: $1,415,287 · Community ImprovementCHANGE LABS+1 more: $6,000 · Community ImprovementNATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC: $300,000 · Civil RightsNATIVE AMERICAN …RESOURCES LEGACY FUND: $75,000 · EnvironmentRESOURCES …The Wildlands Conservancy: $50,000 · EnvironmentThe Wildla…NEW VENTURE FUND: $22,500 · EnvironmentNEW VENTUR…SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $21,612 · EnvironmentSOCIAL AND…AMERICAN RIVERS INC: $12,000 · EnvironmentAMERICAN R…FOUR CORNERS RISING: $10,000 · EnvironmentUTAH STATE UNIVERSITY: $78,750 · OtherFRIENDS OF FLAGSTAFF'S FUTURE: $18,000 · OtherNORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $15,000 · EducationFOODCORPS INC: $6,250 · Food & Nutrition
Community Improvement$1,421,287Civil Rights$300,000Environment$191,112Other$96,750Education$15,000Food & Nutrition$6,250

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCHANGE LABS: $1,415,287 over 3y, 15% of budgetNATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC: $300,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetRESOURCES LEGACY FUND: $75,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetThe Wildlands Conservancy: $50,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $22,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $21,612 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN RIVERS INC: $12,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOUR CORNERS RISING: $10,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetFOODCORPS INC: $6,250 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF FLAGSTAFFS FUTURE: $6,000 over 1y, 6.4% 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 Grand Canyon Trust Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Grand Canyon Trust Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 21%
  • Foodcorps Inc: 21% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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.

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 13 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Grand Canyon’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