Loading…
· Private foundation
The Ricketts Conservation Foundation
This foundation does not accept unsolicited requests — it funds preselected organizations.
$216k
Granted FY2024
5
Grants
2
Communities
$56k
Largest
01What you fund
0184% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2020–2024.
Environment$1.4MEducation$452kAnimals$100kOther$361k
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2020
clark's nutcrackerprotect
2021
clark's nutcrackerprotect
2022
—
2023
—
2024
—
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2024 · 5 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k4 grants · $160k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $56k
$45,469
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
- University of Montana$55,693
- Friends of the Bridger-Teton$48,000
- University of Colorado - Denver$45,469
- Wyoming Wetlands Society$41,666
- Sublette County Conservation District$25,000
02The need
04
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:
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 9% — the area typically sits at 8%. 41% of your dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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 line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
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, United Way ALICE — 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.
79%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.8M · 6 repeat orgs$489k to everyone else
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +169% since the first grant, against +56% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
6
7
Total granted
$1.8M
$416k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+169%
+56%
Still filing today
33%
71%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $73k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
EnvironmentEducationAnimalsOther
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
- WWWyoming Wetlands Society5× · 2020–2024 · $1.0M · revenue +169% · 80% of their budget
Cornell University2× · 2020–2021 · $452k · revenue +17%- UOUniversity of Colorado - Denver3× · 2020–2024 · $100k
Funded once
- TGThe Greater Yellowstone Coalitiongraduatedone grant, 2023 · $163k · revenue +56%
American Forestsgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $110k · revenue +340%- TUTrout Unlimitedgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $100k · revenue +56%
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
Western Rivers Conservancy
Protection of outstanding river ecosystems in the western united states.
Environment
2
Wyoming Outdoor Council
The wyoming outdoor council's mission is to protect wyoming's environment and quality of life now and for future generations
Environment
3
Whatcom Land Trust
Protecting the rich and vibrant lands for a healthy, thriving Whatcom County for generations to come.
Environment
4
Cascadia Wildlands
Cascadia wildands defends and restores cascadia's wild ecosystems in the forests, in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…
Environment
5
Montana Trout Unlimited
To conserve, protect and restore montana's coldwater fisheries and watersheds.
Recreation & Sports
6
Rainforest Trust
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and our planet by creating protected reserves.
International
7
Land Conservancy of West Michigan
The Land Conservancy of West Michigan exists to help people protect, enjoy and care for natural land in West Michigan.
Environment
8
Gallatin Watershed Council Inc
The Gallatin Watershed Council guides collaborative watershed stewardship in the Gallatin Valley for a healthy and productive landscape.
Environment
9
Global Forest Generation
Global Forest Generation restores and protects forest ecosystems in partnership with grassroots leaders and local communities across vast landscapes which play a critical role in preserving water, protecting biodiversity, storing carbon,…
Environment
10
Wyoming Wildlife Federation
Wyoming wildlife federation delivers leadership in conservation for the state's wildlife, hunters, anglers, and conservationists through policy, education, advocacy, and habitat.
Animals
11
Beaverhead Trails Coalition
Enhancement and development of trails on public lands in Beaverhead County
Environment
12
Idaho Forest Restoration Partnership
Environment
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Greater Yellowstone Coalition and the most unlike its peers is Trout Unlimited Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network
8 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
8/8
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Environment$1,362,276Education$451,749Other$361,093Animals$100,000
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.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organisation The Ricketts Conservation 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.
2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: Wyoming Wetlands Society.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
low risk
~10 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 6 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
6 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 2.7× since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 742487790 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on Wyoming Wetlands Society, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 10 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2023; revenue grew over the period.
- WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 80% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to The Ricketts Conservation Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Ricketts Conservation Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines