Skip to content
The Malcolm C Damuth Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Malcolm C Damuth 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.

$156k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$35k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

Environment$983kAnimals$238kCommunity Improvement$24kScience & Tech$23kRecreation & Sports$10kPhilanthropy$700Other$0
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$20,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$5.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY TEXAS$35,000
INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION$25,000
FINGER LAKES TRUST$20,000
HILL COUNTRY CONSERVANCY$20,000
AMERICAN BIRD CONSERVANCY$20,000
FRIENDS OF ARANSAS NWR$20,000
COLORADO RIO GRNADE RESTORATION FOUNDATION$16,000
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 (FY18–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 43% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%NATURE CONSERVANCY ARIZONA: $25k → 11%HARWICH CONSERVATION TRUST: $10k → 8%FINGER LAKES LAND TRUST: $25k → 16%FOSSIL RIM WILDLIFE CENTER: $25k → 9%GULF COAST BIRD OBSERVATORY INC: $38k → 10%TEXAS LAND CONSERVANCY: $25k → 10%BOTANICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF TEXAS: $23k → 11%ARTIST BOAT: $15k → 14%TEXAS PARKS & WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $13k → 14%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY TEXAS: $35k → 16%HOUSTON AUDUBON SOCIETY: $25k → 16%FRIENDS OF ARANSAS NWR: $20k → 17%FRONTERA LAND ALLIANCE: $19k → 21%BUFFALO RIVER FOUNDATION: $25k → 19%NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE ASSOCIATION: $25k → 14%EKNV-YEFOLECV: $30k → 18%INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION: $25k → 9%LIVING LAND TRUST: $24k → 10%DUCKS UNLIMITED (GALVESTON BAY AREA WETLANDS): $25k → 17%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY IN UTAH: $25k → 8%COLORADO RIO GRNADE RESTORATION FOUNDATION: $16k → 17%ARC OF APPALACHIA: $30k → 14%AMERICAN BIRD CONSERVANCY: $20k → 6%THE CONSERVATION FUND: $60k → 7%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY LOUISIANA: $15k → 18%CADDO LAKE INSTITUTE: $25k → 22%FINGER LAKES TRUST: $20k → 16%FOSSIL RIM WILDLIFE CENTER: $25k → 9%FRIENDS OF BRAZORIA NWR: $35k → 10%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY TEXAS: $25k → 16%GALVESTON BAY FOUNDATION: $15k → 16%FRONTERA LAND ALLIANCE: $17k → 21%NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE ASSOCIATION: $25k → 14%EKNV-YEFOLECV: $25k → 18%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $55k → 7%FINGER LAKES LAND TRUST: $19k → 16%GULF COAST BIRD OBSERVATORY: $20k → 10%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY TEXAS: $25k → 16%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $25k → 7%GULF COAST BIRD OBSERVATORY: $20k → 10%THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND: $30k → 10%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY TEXAS: $25k → 16%THE CRADLE OF TEXAS CONSERVANCY: $12k → 10%THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND: $25k → 10%THE CONSERVATION FUND- RIO GRANDE: $20k → 10%HILL COUNTRY CONSERVANCY: $50k → 10%HILL COUNTRY CONSERVANCY: $20k → 10%HILL COUNTRY CONSERVANCY: $15k → 10%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

WI
NY
MA
OH
UT
CO
VA
AZ
AR
DC
LA
AL
TX
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.

52%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$618k · 13 repeat orgs$560k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +86% since the first grant, against +57% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
22

Total granted

$618k
$479k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+86%
+57%

Still filing today

85%
68%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 33% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $81k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentAnimalsPhilanthropyRecreation & SportsScience & TechFood & NutritionOther
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

  • HC
    HILL COUNTRY CONSERVANCY
    5× · 2020–2024 · $155k · revenue +817%
  • GC
    GULF COAST BIRD OBSERVATORY INC
    3× · 2018–2022 · $78k · revenue +103%
  • THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND
    2× · 2018–2019 · $55k · revenue +119%

Funded once

  • THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $60k · revenue +57%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF BRAZORIA NWR
    one grant, 2021 · $35k
  • AO
    ARC OF APPALACHIA
    one grant, 2022 · $30k · revenue +13%
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
Coastal Prairie Conservancy

The Coastal Prairie Conservancy (CPC) works to sustain a resilient Texas by preserving coastal prairies, wetlands, farms, and ranches to benefit people and wildlife forever. Continued on Schedule OCPC conserves land, restores and enhances…

Environment
2
Land Conservancy of West Michigan

Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…

Environment
3
Texas Land Trust Council

To support texas land trusts and promote land conservation efforts in texas. host texas land conservation conference to educate conservation related professionals and volunteers from across the state.

Environment
4
Land Conservancy of Ridgefield Inc

The Land Conservancy of Ridgefield, Inc. ("the Land Conservancy"), founded in 1967, preserves and protects, for the general benefit of the public, Ridgefield, Connecticut's natural resources including land and water resources, the plant…

Environment
5
Rainforest Trust

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

International
6
Bexar Land Trust Inc dba Green Spaces Alliance of South Texas

The mission of Bexar Land Trust (Green Spaces) is to sustain the natural environment and enhance urban spaces through land conservation, community engagement, and education.

Environment
7
Conservation Farms & Ranches

Preserving and enhancing the habitat of wildlife, such as sandhill cranes, waterfowl, raptors, which habitat expenses are supported by agricultural activities.

Housing & Shelter
8
Texas Foundation for Conservation

Fish and wildlife conservation and outreach including public awareness. Fifteen public relations campaign on social media with over 7.5 million impressions. Twenty plus speaking engagements to a variety of conservation organizations…

Animals
9
The Land Trust for Santa Barbara County

To conserve natural resources, agricultural land and open spaces for present and future generations.

Environment
10
Hill Country Alliance

The mission of the Hill Country Alliance is to bring together a diverse coalition of partners to preserve the open spaces, starry night skies, clean and abundant waters, and unique character of the Texas Hill Country.

Environment
11
Bayou Land Conservancy

To preserve land along streams for flood control, clean water, and wildlife in the geographical area that drains into lake houston.

Environment
12
The Trail Conservancy

To protect, enhance and connect the Ann and Roy Butler Trail at Lady Bird Lake for the benefit of all.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Parks and Wildlife Foundation of Texas; the most unlike its peers is Westcave Outdoor Discovery Center. 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

29 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 29 of the 40 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)
11
Early backer (in before they grew)
29/29
Grantees still filing
24/29
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HILL COUNTRY CONSERVANCY: $155,000 · EnvironmentHILL COUNTRY CONSERVANCYTHE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $60,000 · EnvironmentTHE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATIONTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND: $55,000 · EnvironmentTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LANDFOSSIL RIM WILDLIFE CENTER INC: $50,000 · EnvironmentFOSSIL RIM WILDLIFE CENTER INCThe Finger Lakes Land Trust Inc: $43,500 · EnvironmentThe Finger Lakes Land Trust IncThe Frontera Land Alliance: $36,000 · EnvironmentThe Frontera Land AllianceBUFFALO RIVER FOUNDATION: $25,000 · EnvironmentThe Houston Audubon Society: $25,000 · EnvironmentTexas Land Conservancy: $25,000 · EnvironmentCADDO LAKE INSTITUTE INC: $24,500 · Environment+7 more: $88,500 · Environment+7 moreTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $190,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYIndividual grant recipient: $55,354 · OtherIndividual grant recipientFRIENDS OF BRAZORIA NWR: $35,000 · OtherFRIENDS OF BRAZORIA NWRTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY IN UTAH: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $25,000 · OtherDUCKS UNLIMITED (GALVESTON BAY AREA WETLANDS): $25,000 · OtherFRIENDS OF ARANSAS NWR: $20,000 · OtherAUDUBON TEXAS: $20,000 · OtherCradle of Texas Conservancy Inc: $20,000 · OtherTHE CONSERVATION FUND- RIO GRANDE: $20,000 · OtherFINGER LAKES TRUST: $20,000 · Other+3 more: $40,000 · Other+3 moreGULF COAST BIRD OBSERVATORY INC: $77,750 · AnimalsGULF COAST BIRD O…NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE ASSOCIATION: $50,000 · AnimalsNATIONAL WILDLIFE…American Bird Conservancy: $40,000 · AnimalsAmerican Bird Con…INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL CRA…Texas Conservation Alliance: $15,000 · AnimalsTexas Conservatio…ARC OF APPALACHIA: $30,000 · Recreation & SportsLIVING LANDS TRUST: $24,000 · Food & NutritionBOTANICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF TEXAS INC: $23,000 · Science & TechPHILANTHROPY SOUTHWEST: $700 · Philanthropy
Environment$587,500Other$495,354Animals$207,750Recreation & Sports$30,000Food & Nutrition$24,000Science & Tech$23,000Philanthropy$700

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 budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $190,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetHILL COUNTRY CONSERVANCY: $155,000 over 5y, 3.6% of budgetGULF COAST BIRD OBSERVATORY INC: $77,750 over 3y, 6.5% of budgetTHE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $60,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND: $55,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE ASSOCIATION: $50,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetFOSSIL RIM WILDLIFE CENTER INC: $50,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetThe Finger Lakes Land Trust Inc: $43,500 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetAmerican Bird Conservancy: $40,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetThe Frontera Land Alliance: $36,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetARC OF APPALACHIA: $30,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetBUFFALO RIVER FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetThe Houston Audubon Society: $25,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetINTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTexas Land Conservancy: $25,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetCADDO LAKE INSTITUTE INC: $24,500 over 1y, 7.0% of budgetLIVING LANDS TRUST: $24,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetBOTANICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF TEXAS INC: $23,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCradle of Texas Conservancy Inc: $20,000 over 2y, 8.3% of budgetTHE COLORADO RIO GRANDE RESTORATION FOUNDATION: $16,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetTHE NATIVE PRAIRIES ASSOCIATION OF TEXAS: $15,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetTHE ARTIST BOAT INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetGalveston Bay Foundation Inc: $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPARKS AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION OF TEXAS: $12,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBig Thicket Natural Heritage Trust: $10,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetWestcave Outdoor Discovery Center: $10,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetHARWICH CONSERVATION TRUST: $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetPHILANTHROPY SOUTHWEST: $700 over 2y, 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.

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.

Jacob and Terese Hers…The Cynthia & George …Austin Community Foun…The Powell FoundationMeadows Foundation IncCenterpoint Energy Fo…Texas Instruments Fou…Community Foundation …National Fish and Wil…The Dixon Water Found…The Horizon FoundationJames a Buddy Davidso…
Jacob and Terese Hershey FoundationTX19.8× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jacob and Terese Hershey Foundation · The Cynthia & George Mitchell Foundation · Austin Community Foundation Inc · The Powell Foundation · Meadows Foundation Inc · Centerpoint Energy Foundation Inc · Texas Instruments Foundation · Community Foundation of North Texas (Tax · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The Dixon Water Foundation · The Horizon Foundation · James a Buddy Davidson Charitable 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 Malcolm C Damuth Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Malcolm C Damuth Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    9report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Malcolm C Damuth Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Malcolm C Damuth Foundation 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 40 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Malcolm C Damuth’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