Skip to content
The Kingfisher Foundation co Evan AbramsFarella Braun at a glance

· Private foundation

The Kingfisher Foundation co Evan AbramsFarella Braun

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.

$810k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$248k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0186% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Environment$4.8MArts & Culture$654kEducation$578kSocial Science$437kScience & Tech$435kAnimals$350kPhilanthropy$122kCommunity Improvement$115kOther$0
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $92k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $718k
$75,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
University of Michigan Art Museum$248,100
Sustainable Conservation$125,000
Blakemore Foundation$110,211
California Water Data Consortium$100,000
San Mateo Resource Conservation Dis$75,000
International Seafood Sustainabilit$60,000
Multiplier$40,000
EPIC Environ Policy Innovation Cent$40,000
Public Policy Institute of Californ$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 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 94% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Resource Conservation District: $100k → 7%Union of Concerned Scientists: $250k → 10%Multiplier: $90k → 10%Resources Legacy Fund: $100k → 12%Island Conservation: $150k → 13%EmLab - UCSB: $150k → 14%The Aspen Institute: $105k → 14%University of Michigan Art Museum: $248k → 14%Oregon State University: $139k → 18%Duke University: $200k → 12%Net Gains Alliance: $115k → 6%Future of Fish: $75k → 8%EPIC Environ Policy Innovation Cent: $90k → 11%Resource Conservation District: $75k → 7%California Water Data Consortium: $100k → 12%Bren School of Environmental Scienc: $102k → 14%The Aspen Institute: $100k → 14%University of Michigan Art Museum: $76k → 14%Oregon State University: $82k → 18%Duke University: $100k → 12%San Mateo Resource Conservation Dis: $75k → 7%Bren School of Environmental Scienc: $102k → 14%Marine Stewardship Council: $68k → 14%Environmental Defense Fund: $400k → 14%OSU-Lubchenco: $87k → 18%Environmental Defense Fund: $241k → 14%EDF - Ocean Programs: $225k → 14%EDF-Angler Management and Data Mode: $200k → 14%EDF-Japan Rulemaking and Implementa: $200k → 14%EDF - Japanese Fisheries Policy: $200k → 14%Enviornmental Defense Fund-Japan Oc: $180k → 14%Sustainable Conservation: $125k → 10%National Fish and Wildlife Foundati: $250k → 14%Sustainable Conservation: $70k → 10%Environmental Defense Fund: $180k → 14%National Fish Wildlife Foundation: $250k → 14%Environmental Defense Fund: $141k → 14%International Seafood Sustainabilit: $80k → 14%Nature Conservancy: $145k → 10%EDF-Saving the Monarch Butterfly: $100k → 14%Nature Conservancy: $75k → 10%Nature Conservancy: $75k → 10%Environmental Defense Fund: $100k → 14%Environmental Defense Fund: $100k → 14%Ocean Conservancy Inc: $112k → 14%Ocean Conservancy Inc: $112k → 14%The Ocean Conservancy: $90k → 14%Ocean Conservancy Inc: $75k → 14%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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
MI
MA
OR
OH
CA
MD
NC
DC
FL
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.

67%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.8M · 25 repeat orgs$2.8M to everyone else

25 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 16 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

25
23

Total granted

$5.8M
$2.8M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+44%
+63%

Still filing today

48%
39%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
EnvironmentArts & CultureEducationAnimalsSocial ScienceInternationalOther
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

  • ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED
    7× · 2017–2023 · $1.2M · revenue +202%
  • OC
    OCEAN CONSERVANCY
    5× · 2018–2023 · $399k · revenue +31%
  • DUKE UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2019–2020 · $300k · revenue +44%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $250k
  • UO
    Union of Concerned Scientists
    one grant, 2022 · $250k
  • NF
    National Fish Wildlife Foundation
    one grant, 2018 · $250k
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
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
2
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
3
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
4
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
5
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
6
Oceana Inc

To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.

Environment
7
California Wildlife Foundation

The foundation works with diverse groups representing many interests to acquire and restore critical wildlife habitat and protecting species

Animals
8
Conservation Law Foundation Inc

Conservation law foundation, inc. (clf) protects new england's environment for the benefit of all people and future generations. we use the law, science, and markets to create solutions that preserve and restore our natural resources,…

Environment
9
Climate Central Inc

Climate central, inc. (the organization") is an independent not-for-profit organization of leading scientists, technology experts and communication professionals that are dedicated to researching and reporting on climate change and its…

Science & Tech
10
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
11
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
12
Environment Now
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Fish and Wildlife Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Blakemore Foundation. 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

22 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. 22 of the 49 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/22
Grantees still filing
17/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $389,916 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYUniversity of Michigan Art Museum: $323,674 · OtherUniversity of Michigan Art MuseumOregon State University: $277,643 · OtherOregon State UniversityInternational Seafood Sustainabilit: $264,000 · OtherInternational Seafood SustainabilitBren School of Environmental Scienc: $254,504 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $250,000 · OtherUnion of Concerned Scientists: $250,000 · OtherNational Fish Wildlife Foundation: $250,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $245,000 · OtherEDF - Japanese Fisheries Policy: $220,000 · OtherEDF-Angler Management and Data Mode: $200,000 · OtherEDF-Japan Rulemaking and Implementa: $200,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $198,374 · OtherEnviornmental Defense Fund-Japan Oc: $180,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $175,000 · Other+18 more: $1,163,095 · Other+18 moreENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,165,299 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INC…OCEAN CONSERVANCY: $398,832 · EnvironmentOCEAN CONSERVANCYSustainable Conservation: $245,000 · EnvironmentSustainable ConservationMULTIPLIER: $225,000 · EnvironmentMULTIPLIERISLAND CONSERVATION: $150,000 · EnvironmentISLAND CONSERVATIONSEAFOOD HARVESTER OF AMERICA: $100,000 · EnvironmentRESOURCES LEGACY FUND: $100,000 · EnvironmentINTERNEWS NETWORK: $300,000 · Arts & CultureCALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES: $185,000 · Arts & CultureCLEVELAND MUSEUM OF ART: $30,000 · Arts & CultureDUKE UNIVERSITY: $300,018 · EducationBLAKEMORE FOUNDATION: $122,211 · EducationNATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $250,000 · AnimalsGREATER FARALLONES ASSOCIATION: $50,000 · AnimalsCalifornia Water Data Consortium: $250,000 · Science & TechTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $205,000 · Social Science
Other$4,841,206Environment$2,384,131Arts & Culture$515,000Education$422,229Animals$300,000Science & Tech$250,000Social Science$205,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,165,299 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $398,832 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $389,916 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetDUKE UNIVERSITY: $300,018 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNEWS NETWORK: $300,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCalifornia Water Data Consortium: $250,000 over 4y, 14% of budgetNATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $250,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSustainable Conservation: $245,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetMULTIPLIER: $225,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $205,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES: $185,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetISLAND CONSERVATION: $150,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetBLAKEMORE FOUNDATION: $122,211 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetSEAFOOD HARVESTER OF AMERICA: $100,000 over 3y, 29% of budgetRESOURCES LEGACY FUND: $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE COMMONS INC: $52,750 over 2y, 4.5% of budgetGREATER FARALLONES ASSOCIATION: $50,000 over 1y, 3.5% of budgetTHE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER INC: $40,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA: $32,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCLEVELAND MUSEUM OF ART: $30,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetADM CAPITAL FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetCODE FOR AMERICA LABS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds OCEAN CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds DUKE UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds INTERNEWS NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds California Water Data Consortium ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Sustainable Conservation ↗
  • Who funds MULTIPLIER ↗
  • Who funds THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES ↗
  • Who funds ISLAND CONSERVATION ↗
  • Who funds BLAKEMORE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SEAFOOD HARVESTER OF AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds RESOURCES LEGACY FUND ↗
  • Who funds THE COMMONS INC ↗
  • Who funds GREATER FARALLONES ASSOCIATION ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Silicon Valley Commun…The Pew Charitable Tr…The David and Lucile …The William & Flora H…Marin Community Found…The San Francisco Fou…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA15× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The Pew Charitable Trusts · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Kingfisher Foundation co Evan AbramsFarella Braun funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Kingfisher Foundation co Evan AbramsFarella Braun. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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
    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 Kingfisher Foundation co Evan AbramsFarella Braun?

    Find your warmest path to The Kingfisher Foundation co Evan AbramsFarella Braun 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 49 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-PF 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 Kingfisher Foundation co Evan AbramsFarella Braun’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