· Private foundation
The Litterman Family Foundation
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 35 grants below total $1,340,500 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,390,500 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $50,000 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k15 grants · $66k
- $10k–50k13 grants · $175k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $400k
- $250k+2 grants · $700k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| World Wildlife Fund | $400,000 |
| Climate Leadership Council | $300,000 |
| The Niskanen Center Inc. | $150,000 |
| Stanford University | $100,000 |
| Climate Central | $50,000 |
| Woodwell Climate Research Center | $50,000 |
| Ceres | $50,000 |
| Stanford University | $25,000 |
| CDC Foundation | $25,000 |
| Resources For The Future | $25,000 |
| UNCF | $10,000 |
| Tidelines Institute | $10,000 |
| National Multiple Sclerosis Society | $10,000 |
| World Wildlife Fund | $10,000 |
| The Crane Institute of Sustainability Inc | $10,000 |
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 +8% since the first grant, against -13% for the ones you funded once.
26 repeat relationships — 25 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $525k 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
- TNTHE NISKANEN CENTER INC2× · 2022–2023 · $450k · revenue +48%
Woodwell Climate Research Center Inc2× · 2023–2024 · $450k · revenue +5%- CCCLIMATE CENTRAL INC2× · 2023–2024 · $100k · revenue +132%
Funded once
- AFADVOCATES FOR CLIMATE INNOVATIONone grant, 2022 · $63k · revenue -16%
- CCaresone grant, 2023 · $50k
- NYNew York Universityone grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue +21%
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.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
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…
The climate institute is organized for the purpose of educating the general public and policy makers as to the gravity of potential climate change, exploring the policy implications of the latest scientific findings on climate modelling…
Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.
To research and develop centrist policy ideas.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.
2025 was a turbulent year for the medical and health research community, but our commitment to advocating for science never wavered. from pushing back against funding threats to elevating researchers' voices and equipping advocates, we…
Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.
Climateworks foundation's mission is to connect philanthropy, grantees, and strategic partners to build and deliver high-impact climate solutions that benefit all people.
We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Save the Children Federation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Advocates for Climate Innovation. 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 41 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
39 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. 39 of the 51 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 THE NISKANEN CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Woodwell Climate Research Center Inc ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE LEADERSHIP COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE CENTRAL INC ↗
- Who funds ADVOCATES FOR CLIMATE INNOVATION ↗
- Who funds Resources for the Future Inc ↗
- Who funds CERES INC ↗
- Who funds COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC ↗
- Who funds TIDELINES INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds The Crane Institute of Sustainability Inc ↗
- Who funds ATLANTIC COUNCIL OF THE UNITED STATES INC ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds BRIGHTFOCUS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds New York University ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF THE YAMPA VALLEY ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE INC ↗
- Who funds PENINSULA HUMANE SOCIETY & SPCA ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY ↗
- Who funds YAMPA VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds Northwest Colorado Community Health Partnership Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FINANCE ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds MONTEREY BAY AQUARIUM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED NEGRO COLLEGE FUND INC ↗
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 William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · Climateworks Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Greater Washington Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation 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.