Skip to content

· Public charity

The Recycling Partnership Inc

Our mission is to build a better recycling system, one that delivers the economic and environmental benefits our communities and the hundreds of thousands of people who work throughout the recycling industry deserve.

$16M
Granted FY2024still arriving
113
Grants FY2024still arriving
34
States reached
$1.6M
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Environment$54MAnimals$2.0MArts & Culture$1.4MPublic Benefit$828kScience & Tech$822kHousing & Shelter$806kHuman Services$639kCommunity Improvement$422kOther$0
02FY2024 · 113 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 113 grants below total $14,897,457, the rows itemized in this filing. The $15,574,536 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $677,079 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k17 grants · $123k
  • $10k–50k34 grants · $812k
  • $50k–250k48 grants · $5.8M
  • $250k+14 grants · $8.2M
$65,020
Median grant
34
States reached
$46M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITY OF FLINT$1,625,903
CITY OF MCKINNEY$813,116
BALCONES RECYCLING INC$652,775
VALEMI INC$646,494
CITY OF SYRACUSE$632,507
CITY OF STERLING HEIGHTS$603,339
SOLID WASTE SERVICES INC DBA JP MASCARO & SONS$542,939
CITY OF FORT COLLINS$516,309
CITY OF FORT WORTH$481,568
POLYSTAMP LLC$448,000
POPE DOUGLAS SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT$352,000
CHESTER COUNTY GOVERNMENT DBA CHESTER COUNTY SOLID WASTE & WEST TN RECYCLIN$316,800
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL AUTHORITY OF BALDWIN COUNTY ALABAMA INC DBA BALDWIN$297,600
MECKLENBURG COUNTY$280,000
SOUTH TAHOE REFUSE CO INC$231,725
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:

Its human-services grants (FY24–24, $21k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CGLR FOUNDATION: $21k → 17%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

ME
VT
NH
WA
ND
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
CO
NE
MO
KY
VA
MD
DE
AZ
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
DC
HI
OK
LA
AL
GA
TX
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.

62%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$38M · 124 repeat orgs$23M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +38% since the first grant, against +31% for those funded once.

124 repeat relationships: 60 still active in FY2024, 64 since wound down; 52 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

124
81

Total granted

$38M
$12M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+38%
+31%

Still filing today

3%
9%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 25% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $11M 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
EnvironmentEducationHousing & ShelterHuman ServicesPhilanthropyArts & CultureOther
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

  • GS
    GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $549k · revenue +49%
  • RA
    RECYCLE ANN ARBOR
    3× · 2022–2024 · $186k · revenue +0%
  • KA
    KEEP AKRON BEAUTIFUL
    2× · 2019–2021 · $115k · revenue +12%

Funded once

  • BC
    BALTIMORE CIVIC FUND INC
    one grant, 2022 · $1.5M · revenue -5%
  • CO
    CITY OF KANSAS CITY MISSOURI
    2× · 2022–2023 · $1.5M
  • UP
    US PLASTICS PACT INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $1.2M · revenue +31% · 100% of their budget
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
Eco-Cycle Inc

Eco-cycle's mission is to innovate, implement, and advocate for local and global zero waste solutions to foster a more sustainable, equitable, and climate-resilient future.

Environment
2
Mindful Waste
—
3
Alliance to End Plastic Waste Inc

See schedule osee narrative to form 990, part i, line 1, description of organization mission (per may 2024 bylaws).

Environment
4
Northeast Recycling Council Inc

Nerc's mission is to minimize waste, conserve natural resources, and advance a sustainable economy through facilitated collaboration and action.

Environment
5
Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives

GAIAs mission is to strengthen grassroots social movements that advance solutions to waste and pollution, working towards a just, zero waste world where people are free from toxic pollution.

Environment
6
The Rockbridge Area Conservation Council

The mission of the rockbridge area conservation council (rockbridge conservation or rc) is to promote and enhance the protection, sustainable use, and stewardship of our community's natural and cultural resources.

—
7
Ocean Conservancy

Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.

Environment
8
Recycling Alliance of Texas

The mission is to advance recycling through partnerships, education, and advocacy for the benefit of texas.

Environment
9
Global Envirotech Initiative
Philanthropy
10
Product Stewardship Institute Inc

The Product Stewardship Institute is a policy expert and consulting nonprofit that powers the emerging circular economy to ensure products are responsibly managed from design to end of life. In 2000, PSI pioneered extended producer…

Community Improvement
11
Plastic Free Tristomo

Eliminate plastic pollution on the beaches of Tristomo and protect the environment and culture of Karpathos.

Environment
12
Zero Waste Washington

Zero Waste Washington drives policy change for a healthy and waste free world. We envision a just, equitable, and sustainable future where we all produce, consume, and reuse responsibly. We are the publics voice for zero waste. We educate…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Minnesota Waste Wise Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Plastic Beach. 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

15 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. 15 of the 257 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
10/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE: $2,034,027 · Other+191 more: $54,164,846 · Other+191 moreUS PLASTICS PACT INC: $1,205,091 · EnvironmentRECYCLE ANN ARBOR: $186,000 · EnvironmentKEEP AKRON BEAUTIFUL: $115,200 · EnvironmentTHE NEIGHBORHOOD RECYCLING CORPORATION: $100,000 · Environment+1 more: $49,500 · EnvironmentBALTIMORE CIVIC FUND INC: $1,512,144 · PhilanthropyGEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $549,477 · EducationEssex County Parks Foundation: $60,000 · Recreation & Sports
Other$56,198,873Environment$1,655,791Philanthropy$1,512,144Education$549,477Recreation & Sports$60,000

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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 budgetBALTIMORE CIVIC FUND INC: $1,512,144 over 1y, 7.9% of budgetUS PLASTICS PACT INC: $1,205,091 over 1y, 100% of budgetGEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $549,477 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetRECYCLE ANN ARBOR: $186,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetKEEP AKRON BEAUTIFUL: $115,200 over 2y, 8.8% of budgetTHE NEIGHBORHOOD RECYCLING CORPORATION: $100,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetEssex County Parks Foundation: $60,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetLIVE-THRIVE INC: $49,500 over 1y, 3.0% 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 BALTIMORE CIVIC FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds US PLASTICS PACT INC ↗
  • Who funds GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗

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.

Cities for Financial Empowerment Fund IncNY63.5× affinity31 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Cities for Financial Empowerment Fund Inc · National Recreation and Park Association · Center for Technology and Civic Life · National League of Cities Institute Inc · FitLot · Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation Inc · AARP · Urban Sustainability Directors Network · US Green Building Council Inc · Institute for Responsive Government Inc · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Our Rescue

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 Recycling Partnership Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Recycling Partnership Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%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
    5report 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.

    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 257 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 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 Recycling Partnership’s filings →

    More from the funding graph