· Private foundation
The Passport 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 FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k18 grants · $27k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $150k
- $50k–250k18 grants · $1.8M
- $250k+2 grants · $600k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| EARTHJUSTICE | $300,000 |
| NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC | $300,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO | $200,000 |
| TOXIC-FREE FUTURE | $175,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP | $125,000 |
| COMING CLEAN INC | $125,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL POLLUTANTS ELIMINATION NETWORK | $125,000 |
| TOXIC-FREE FUTURE | $125,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION NETWORK | $110,000 |
| CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW INC | $110,000 |
| BREAST CANCER PREVENTION PARTNERS | $100,000 |
| ROSE FOUNDATION FOR COMMUNITIES AND THE ENVIRONMEN | $100,000 |
| SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS | $80,000 |
| THE ARC OF THE UNITED STATES | $75,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES | $75,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY20–24, $432k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
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.
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.
50 repeat relationships — 29 still active in FY2024, 21 since wound down; 9 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, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $258k 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
- TFTOXIC-FREE FUTURE F/K/A WASHINGTON TOXICS COALITION5× · 2020–2024 · $1.6M · revenue +15%
- HHABITABLE4× · 2020–2023 · $1.3M · revenue +65%
- MMIRACLEFEET4× · 2020–2023 · $1.3M · revenue +3%
Funded once
- TRTHE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT SANone grant, 2022 · $125k
- UOUNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO - UC REGENTSone grant, 2020 · $100k
- CPCALIFORNIA POLICY CENTERone grant, 2020 · $100k · revenue +13%
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.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
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…
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…
Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
Heal utah's mission is to protect utah's environment and its people by promoting clean air, clean energy, and comprehensive solutions to radioactive and toxic waste.
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,…
To raise awareness about the potential to reduce environmental harm by shifting electricity use to particular times; to encourage the development and spread of common protocols for this practice.
Cdp north america, inc. 's ("cdp-na") vision for the future is a thriving economy that works for people and planet in the long term. we focus investors and companies on taking urgent action to build a truly sustainable economy by measuring…
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
Educational & charitable. to provide legal and scientific information to public interest attorneys and scientists in numerous countries.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc and the most unlike its peers is HUGZ4HAITI. 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 31 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
107 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. 107 of the 128 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 TOXIC-FREE FUTURE F/K/A WASHINGTON TOXICS COALITION ↗
- Who funds HABITABLE ↗
- Who funds MIRACLEFEET ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds BREAST CANCER PREVENTION PARTNERS ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW INC ↗
- Who funds COMING CLEAN INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST ↗
- Who funds GREEN SCIENCE POLICY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION NETWORK ↗
- Who funds THE ARC OF THE UNITED STATES ↗
- Who funds DEFEND OUR HEALTH ↗
- Who funds Center for Environmental Health ↗
- Who funds VIRGINIA ORGANIZING INC ↗
- Who funds ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC ↗
- Who funds CLEAN AND HEALTHY NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds BlueGreen Alliance Foundation ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Pesticide Action Network North America ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC ↗
- Who funds BENNINGTON COLLEGE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds BLACK WOMEN FOR WELLNESS ↗
- Who funds CLEAN WATER FUND ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES ↗
- Who funds CLEAN PRODUCTION ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds THE ROSE FOUNDATION FOR COMMUNITIES THE ENVIRONMENT ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA POLICY CENTER ↗
- Who funds BUSINESS EXECUTIVES FOR NATIONAL SECURITY ↗
- Who funds PRACTICE GREENHEALTH ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S VOICES FOR THE EARTH ↗
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: Forsythia Foundation Inc · The Marisla Foundation · Maine Community Foundation Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · Cloud Mountain Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Lisa & Douglas Goldman Fund · Marin Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Fine Fund
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 Passport Foundation 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.
- Out in the Open Inc — 25% of income from government
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- Chesapeake Bay Foundation Inc — 2% of income from government
- Feed the Children Inc — 1% of income from government
- Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc — 0% of income from government
- Bennington College Corporation — 0% of income from government
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.