Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

The Partnership Project Action Fund

The Partnership Project Action Fund helps the environmental community work more collaboratively to advocate for the protection of the natural environment.

$1.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
17
Grants FY2024still arriving
8
States reached
$579k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

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

Environment$11MPublic Benefit$2.1MCivil Rights$745kCommunity Improvement$668kFood & Nutrition$393kAnimals$362kHealth$178kReligion$95kOther$0
02FY2024 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $166k
  • $50k–250k7 grants · $717k
  • $250k+1 grant · $579k
$42,500
Median grant
8
States reached
$13M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Green Light Action$579,096
Electrification Coalition Alliance$191,500
League of Conservation Voters$163,000
American Lung Association$100,000
Virginia Organizing Group$92,000
Earthjustice Action$69,000
Securing America's Future Energy Alliance Inc$51,500
Generation180$50,000
Tides Advocacy$42,500
EOPA Code Blue Water Solutions$30,000
Sierra Club Foundation$25,000
Institute for a Progressive Nevada$22,800
Ceres Inc$15,000
EEN Action$11,000
Clean Air Action Fund$10,000
02The need
03

Do your dollars go where the need is?

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

show:

Your human-services grants (FY24–24, $52k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Securing America's Future Energy Alliance Inc: $52k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

Which US states your grants reach

ME
MT
MN
MI
NY
MA
NV
IA
IN
PA
CA
UT
CO
VA
MD
AZ
NC
SC
DC
GA
FL

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$11M · 22 repeat orgs$4.0M to everyone else

22 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 15 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
37

Total granted

$11M
$2.9M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+54%
+80%

Still filing today

100%
89%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 29% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.0M went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentCivil RightsPublic BenefitHealthEducationCommunity ImprovementOther

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

  • LO
    LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $2.5M · revenue +388%
  • TA
    TIDES ADVOCACY
    7× · 2018–2024 · $1.6M · revenue +130%
  • MF
    MI FAMILIA VOTA
    4× · 2017–2022 · $439k · revenue ×11

Funded once

  • BF
    BUSINESS FORWARD INC
    one grant, 2021 · $646k · revenue -18%
  • MH
    MONTANA HUNTERS AND ANGLERS ACTIONgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $533k · revenue +938%
  • IF
    IOWA FARMERS UNION
    one grant, 2020 · $393k · revenue -64% · 50% of their budget

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

04Your field

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.

1
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators

The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.

Education
2
Environment America Research and Policy Center Inc

The purpose of the corporation is to engage in public education within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code. the corporation may engage in public interest research, policy development, analysis, public education,…

Environment
3
Partnership for Policy Integrity

Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.

Environment
4
E3G Third Generation Environmentalism

E3g is a leading international not-for-profit think tank specialising in climate diplomacy harnessing expertise in the politics and economics of climate change.

Environment
5
California Environmental Justice Alliance

Our mission is to fight against fossil fuel executives and industries that have turned our communities into dumping grounds for toxic waste, poisoning our air, water, lan, and bodies. We organize to oppose giant oil refineries, dirty…

Environment
6
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
7
Coalition for Green Capital D/B/a American Green Bank Consortium

Cgc operates as a nonprofit financial institution that invests directly and through partners to transform financial markets by using public and private investing to accelerate the deployment of projects that strengthen the grid, reduce…

Environment
8
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
9
Texas Campaign for the Environment

Empowering Texans to fight pollution through sustained grassroots organizing campaigns that shift corporate and governmental policy.

Environment
10
California Environmental Voters

To increase public awareness of elected officials' performances on environmental issues, to influence decisions of public officials on environmental legislation and policy, and to engage in related social welfare activities to promote and…

Civil Rights
11
Climate Innovation Action Inc

To educate policymakers about climate policies generally and to directly advocate for specific legislation on climate change.

Environment
12
California Environmental Voters Education Fund

ENVIROVOTERS ED FUND is a nonpartisan organization dedicated to improving the quality of the environment for all Californians. ENVIROVOTERS ED FUND works to build the capacity of environmental organizations by developing and providing…

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environment America Inc and the most unlike its peers is United States Partnership for Education for Sustainable Developme. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyEnvironmental Conservation …Policy Research and AdvocacyMilitary Veterans SupportHealth Access Advocacy and …Immigrant Worker Support
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 24 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number20%9%<5yr14%4%5–10yr18%29%10–20yr18%25%20–35yr16%16%35–55yr15%18%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value20%5%<5yr14%3%5–10yr18%31%10–20yr18%26%20–35yr16%22%35–55yr15%13%55yr+

The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 9% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/71
the rest of the field
12%
1,600/12,930

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.

04the grantee network

68 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. 68 of the 71 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.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
21
Early backer (in before they grew)
67/68
Grantees still filing
42/68
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

ENVIRONMENT AMERICA INC — $2,477,380 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENT AMERICA INCENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE ACTION FUND — $1,069,797 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE ACTION FUNDGREENLIGHT ACTION — $579,096 · EnvironmentGREENLIGHT ACTIONEARTHJUSTICE ACTION — $372,900 · EnvironmentEARTHJUSTICE ACTIONCLIMATE REALITY ACTION FUND — $194,783 · EnvironmentELECTRIFICATION COALITION ALLIANCE INC — $191,500 · Environment+21 more — $822,405 · Environment+21 moreTIDES ADVOCACY — $1,550,056 · OtherTIDES ADVOCACYSIERRA CLUB — $885,235 · OtherSIERRA CLUBMONTANA HUNTERS AND ANGLERS ACTION — $532,623 · OtherMONTANA HUNTERS AND ANGLERS ACTIO…IOWA FARMERS UNION — $392,750 · OtherIOWA FARMERS UNIONNRDC ACTION FUND INC — $368,000 · OtherNRDC ACTION FUND INC+23 more — $862,204 · Other+23 moreLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $2,523,401 · Civil RightsLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOT…MI FAMILIA VOTA — $438,837 · Civil RightsMI FAMILIA VOTACONSERVATION COLORADO — $278,113 · Civil RightsCONSERVATION COLORADOPEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY FOUNDATION — $250,000 · Civil RightsPEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WA…+3 more — $160,550 · Civil RightsBUSINESS FORWARD INC — $646,000 · Community ImprovementVIRGINIA ORGANIZING INC — $104,375 · Community ImprovementNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION — $338,636 · AnimalsPUBLIC CITIZEN INC — $107,500 · Public BenefitCENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS ACTION FUND — $33,333 · Public BenefitTAXPAYERS FOR COMMON SENSE — $15,000 · Public BenefitCLEAN AIR ACTION FUND — $10,000 · Public BenefitAMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION — $100,000 · HealthNational Medical Association — $47,000 · Health
Environment$5,707,861Other$4,590,868Civil Rights$3,650,901Community Improvement$750,375Animals$338,636Public Benefit$165,833Health$147,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $2,523,401 over 8y, 2.6% of budgetENVIRONMENT AMERICA INC — $2,477,380 over 6y, 4.3% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY — $1,550,056 over 7y, 1.5% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE ACTION FUND — $1,069,797 over 7y, 2.3% of budgetSIERRA CLUB — $885,235 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetBUSINESS FORWARD INC — $646,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetGREENLIGHT ACTION — $579,096 over 1y, 29% of budgetMI FAMILIA VOTA — $438,837 over 4y, 5.3% of budgetIOWA FARMERS UNION — $392,750 over 1y, 50% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE ACTION — $372,900 over 3y, 15% of budgetNRDC ACTION FUND INC — $368,000 over 5y, 3.1% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION — $338,636 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetCONSERVATION COLORADO — $278,113 over 2y, 7.8% of budgetPEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY FOUNDATION — $250,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetCLIMATE REALITY ACTION FUND — $194,783 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetELECTRIFICATION COALITION ALLIANCE INC — $191,500 over 1y, 45% of budgetThe Partnership Project Inc — $172,656 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetBlack Voters Matter Fund Inc — $112,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetPUBLIC CITIZEN INC — $107,500 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetVIRGINIA ORGANIZING INC — $104,375 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS — $102,500 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetAMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION — $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL SECURITY ACTION — $95,000 over 2y, 5.2% of budgetHIP HOP CAUCUS ACTION FUND — $90,000 over 1y, 26% of budgetBlueGreen Alliance Inc — $82,400 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND — $72,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgettriplecheck — $70,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetEOPA Code Blue Water Solutions — $65,000 over 2y, 60% of budgetDREAMORG — $62,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetTHE NATIONAL RELIGIOUS PARTNERSHIP FOR THE ENVIRONMENT INC — $60,000 over 3y, 14% of budgetVOTEVETS ACTION FUND INC — $55,992 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetWest Harlem Environmental Action Inc — $55,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSECURING AMERICA'S FUTURE ENERGY ALLIANCE INC — $51,500 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetGENERATION180 — $50,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetNational Medical Association — $47,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE — $36,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS ACTION FUND — $33,333 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetPHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY — $30,825 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetNEXTGEN CLIMATE AMERICA INC — $30,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetFEDERATION OF STATE CONSERVATION VOTER LEAGUES — $30,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetGreenLatinos — $30,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION — $28,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCLEAN WATER ACTION — $24,500 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR A PROGRESSIVE NEVADA — $22,800 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetTHE REGENERATION PROJECT — $21,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetUNIDOSUS — $20,450 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE NETWORK — $20,000 over 1y, 7.0% of budgetVirginia League of Conservation Voters Education Fund — $20,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budget
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.

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.

The Partnership Proje…Energy Action FundUnited States Energy …Sixteen Thirty FundEnvironmental Defense…League of Conservatio…Natural Resources Def…Tides FoundationNew Venture FundFund for a Better Fut…Nrdc Action Fund IncThe Energy Foundation
The Partnership Project IncDC61.2× affinity27 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Partnership Project Inc · Energy Action Fund · United States Energy Foundation · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated · League of Conservation Voters Inc · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · Tides Foundation · New Venture Fund · Fund for a Better Future Inc · Nrdc Action Fund Inc · The Energy Foundation

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.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization The Partnership Project Action Fund funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%4%15%34%60%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Ceres Inc — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
3report 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

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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 71 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

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

Source object · view filing

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