Skip to content
The Rose Foundation for Communities the Environment at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

The Rose Foundation for Communities the Environment

To support grassroots initiatives to inspire community action to protect the environment, consumers, and public health.

$9.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$9.3M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Environment$17MCivil Rights$608kCommunity Improvement$545kPublic Benefit$258kHuman Services$240kFood & Nutrition$181kEducation$155kEmployment$75kOther$0
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$9,341,169
Median grant
1
States reached
$27M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$9,341,169
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 (FY17–20, $528k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 41% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%PATHWAYS PA: $65k → 10%UPVALLEY FAMILY CENTERS: $75k → 9%REDWOOD COMMUNITY ACTION AGEN: $17k → 18%Justice for Families: $10k → 17%CENTRO LATINO OF SHELBYVILLE: $41k → 9%UPVALLEY FAMILY CENTERS: $12k → 9%NORTH COAST OPPORTUNITIES GAR: $9k → 18%CENTRO LATINO OF SHELBYVILLE: $40k → 9%Marin City Peoples Plan: $6k → 8%CASH CAMPAIGN OF MARYLAND: $65k → 19%Redwood Community Action Agen: $7k → 18%Sierra Forest Legacy: $11k → 8%Project Grow: $25k → 10%Healthy Community Resources a: $6k → 23%Orange County Environmental J: $25k → 10%TIDES CENTER: $35k → 10%REACH FOR HOME: $10k → 9%AsianWeek FoundationFlorence: $5k → 10%Proyecto Pastoral: $16k → 14%Latino Community Fund: $25k → 9%Latino Community Fund: $25k → 9%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

AK
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
IA
PA
NJ
CT
CA
CO
MO
KY
MD
AZ
NM
TN
NC
DC
LA
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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$42M · 118 repeat orgs$6.4M to everyone else

118 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 117 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

118
224

Total granted

$42M
$6.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+67%
+71%

Still filing today

90%
81%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
EnvironmentCommunity ImprovementAnimalsEducationHuman ServicesPublic BenefitOther
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

  • FB
    Fresno Building Healthy Communities
    4× · 2017–2020 · $4.1M · revenue +240% · 91% of their budget
  • TR
    THE ROSE FOUNDATION FOR COMMUNITIES THE ENVIRONMENT
    3× · 2017–2020 · $265k · revenue +25%
  • LEWIS & CLARK COLLEGE
    3× · 2018–2020 · $190k · revenue +30%

Funded once

  • CO
    CENTER ON RACE POVERTY & THE ENVIRONMENT
    one grant, 2017 · $334k · revenue +20%
  • CP
    CALIFORNIA PRODUCT STEWARDSHIP COUNCILgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $239k · revenue +141% · 34% of their budget
  • CI
    California Indian Environmental Alliancegraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $150k · revenue +43% · 32% 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
Sustainable Conservation

Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…

Environment
2
Western Resource Advocates

Western Resource Advocates (WRA) is a regional nonprofit advocacy organization fighting climate change and its impacts to sustain the environment, economy, and people of the West. As the region's go-to experts for more than three decades,…

Crime & Legal
3
Environmental Action Committee of West Marin

To protect and sustain the unique lands, waters, and biodiversity of west marin.

Environment
4
Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council

The Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council is a local nonprofit organization that strives to enhance and restore habitat for fish and wildlife our community and for future generations. Our Board of Directors consists of seven members with…

Environment
5
10000 Years Institute

10,000 Years Institute evaluates the ecological effects of human activities on natural environments, and promotes the maintenance and restoration of ecological integrity through the integration of reliable scientific information, sound…

Unclassified
6
Center for Environmental Law & Policy

The Center for Environmental Law & Policy is a statewide organization whose mission is to protect, preserve and restore Washington's waters through education, advocacy, policy reform, and public interest litigation.

Environment
7
Oregon Natural Resources Council Fund

Oregon Wild works to protect and restore Oregon's wildlands, wildlife and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations.

Environment
8
Southeast Alaska Conservation Council Inc-Seacc

SEACC's mission is to protect the special places of the world's largest temperate rainforest, promote conservation, and advocate for sustainability in human use of natural resources. Inspired by the land, wildlife, cultures, and…

Environment
9
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
10
San Francisco Estuary Institute

Provide scientific support and tools for decision making and communication through collaborative efforts.

Environment
11
Cascadia Wildlands

Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia'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
12
Center for Sustainable Economy

Promoting economic sustainability

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc; the most unlike its peers is Hollygrove Neighbors Neighborhood Association. 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

304 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. 304 of the 352 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.

12
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
142
Early backer (in before they grew)
297/304
Grantees still filing
231/304
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $29,977,333 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+75 more: $4,835,137 · Other+75 moreFresno Building Healthy Communities: $4,062,025 · Community ImprovementFresno Buildi…COMMON COUNSEL FOUNDATION: $511,589 · Community ImprovementCOMMON COUNSE…CALIFORNIA PRODUCT STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL: $238,876 · Community Improvement+10 more: $635,500 · Community Improvement+10 moreGreenaction for Health and Environmental Justice: $390,000 · EnvironmentGreenaction …THE ROSE FOUNDATION FOR COMMUNITIES THE ENVIRONMENT: $265,115 · EnvironmentThe Sierra Fund: $220,000 · Environment+81 more: $4,191,114 · Environment+81 moreWILD FISH CONSERVANCY: $109,000 · AnimalsSR3 Sealife Response Rehabilitation and Research: $99,536 · AnimalsCENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC: $87,310 · AnimalsDefenders of Wildlife: $75,000 · AnimalsLONG LIVE THE KINGS: $65,000 · AnimalsMID PUGET SOUND FISHERIES ENHANCEMENT GR: $50,000 · AnimalsSOUTH PUGET SOUND SALMON ENHANCEMENT GROUP: $35,000 · AnimalsNOOKSACK SALMON ENHANCEMENT ASSOCIATION: $34,780 · AnimalsWILD SALMON CENTER: $31,500 · AnimalsSKAGIT FISHERIES ENHANCEMENT GROUP: $31,332 · AnimalsCENTER ON RACE POVERTY & THE ENVIRONMENT: $334,159 · Crime & LegalCALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE INC: $137,873 · Crime & LegalCHHAYA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $69,241 · Crime & LegalLEWIS & CLARK COLLEGE: $190,000 · EducationCSU BAKERSFIELD AUXILIARY FOR SPONSORED PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION: $93,652 · EducationCALIFORNIA WESTERN SCHOOL OF LAW: $80,000 · EducationECONOMIC AWARENESS COUNCIL: $50,000 · EducationIndian Cultural Organization: $41,400 · EducationSALISH SEA SCIENCES: $40,000 · EducationSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $36,500 · EducationTIDES CENTER: $95,989 · Human ServicesUPVALLEY FAMILY CENTERS OF NAPA COUNTY: $87,000 · Human ServicesCENTRO LATINO OF SHELBYVILLE INC: $81,000 · Human ServicesPATHWAYS PA INC: $65,000 · Human ServicesCASH CAMPAIGN OF MARYLAND INC: $65,000 · Human ServicesLatino Community Fund of Washington State: $50,000 · Human ServicesVENTURES: $25,000 · Human Services
Other$34,812,470Community Improvement$5,447,990Environment$5,066,229Animals$618,458Crime & Legal$541,273Education$531,552Human Services$468,989

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%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFresno Building Healthy Communities: $4,062,025 over 4y, 91% of budgetCOMMON COUNSEL FOUNDATION: $511,589 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetGreenaction for Health and Environmental Justice: $390,000 over 3y, 3.2% of budgetCENTER ON RACE POVERTY & THE ENVIRONMENT: $334,159 over 1y, 13% of budgetTHE ROSE FOUNDATION FOR COMMUNITIES THE ENVIRONMENT: $265,115 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetCALIFORNIA PRODUCT STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL: $238,876 over 1y, 34% of budgetThe Sierra Fund: $220,000 over 2y, 6.3% of budgetLEWIS & CLARK COLLEGE: $190,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCalifornia Indian Environmental Alliance: $150,000 over 1y, 32% of budgetCentral Sierra Environmental Resource Center Inc: $140,000 over 1y, 34% of budgetCALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE INC: $137,873 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE COALITION FOR WATER: $130,000 over 2y, 19% of budgetLummi Island Heritage Trust: $128,220 over 2y, 25% of budgetSierra Streams Institute: $122,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetSUSTAINABLE SEATTLE: $115,000 over 3y, 9.7% of budgetWILD FISH CONSERVANCY: $109,000 over 3y, 3.6% of budgetFUTUREWISE: $101,270 over 3y, 5.8% of budgetRussian Riverkeeper: $100,000 over 3y, 6.2% of budgetTuolumne River Preservation Trust dba Yosemite Rivers Alliance: $100,000 over 1y, 9.3% of budgetSR3 Sealife Response Rehabilitation and Research: $99,536 over 2y, 4.8% of budgetCalifornia Sportfishing Protection Allia: $99,470 over 2y, 22% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $95,989 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCSU BAKERSFIELD AUXILIARY FOR SPONSORED PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION: $93,652 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetRural Community Assistance Corporation: $93,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetEarthcorps: $92,500 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetLOS ANGELES WATERKEEPER: $91,500 over 4y, 2.0% of budgetDELRIDGE NEIGHBORHOODS DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION: $90,000 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetCENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC: $87,310 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetUPVALLEY FAMILY CENTERS OF NAPA COUNTY: $87,000 over 2y, 2.3% of budgetCENTRO LATINO OF SHELBYVILLE INC: $81,000 over 2y, 7.3% of budgetPUGET SOUNDKEEPER ALLIANCE: $80,000 over 1y, 6.5% of budgetLOS PADRES FORESTWATCH INC: $80,000 over 4y, 3.8% of budgetCALIFORNIA WESTERN SCHOOL OF LAW: $80,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE CENTER: $76,000 over 2y, 9.6% of budgetEAST BAY ASIAN LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $75,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHOUSING AND ECONOMIC RIGHTS ADVOCATES: $75,000 over 1y, 7.4% of budgetOWEESTA CORPORATION: $75,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetNEW ECONOMY PROJECT INC: $75,000 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetDefenders of Wildlife: $75,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCOMMUNITIES FOR A HEALTHY BAY: $75,000 over 3y, 5.8% of budgetMISSION ASSET FUND: $75,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetJUMA VENTURES INC: $75,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetSierra Foothill Conservancy: $72,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $70,000 over 2y, 6.8% of budgetMARYLAND CONSUMER RIGHTS COALITION INC: $70,000 over 2y, 7.1% of budgetCLEAN WATER FUND: $69,500 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetCHHAYA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $69,241 over 1y, 3.9% of budgetConservation Action Fund for Education: $69,000 over 3y, 23% 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.

PatagoniaorgResources Legacy FundThe Bullitt FoundationEnvironment NowClif Family FoundationThe Satterberg Founda…The Russell Family Fo…The Northwest Fund fo…The Marisla FoundationThe Keith Campbell Fo…Leonardo Dicaprio Fou…The Burning Foundation
PatagoniaorgCA98.2× affinity91 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Patagoniaorg · Resources Legacy Fund · The Bullitt Foundation · Environment Now · Clif Family Foundation · The Satterberg Foundation Inc · The Russell Family Foundation · The Northwest Fund for the Environment · The Marisla Foundation · The Keith Campbell Foundation for the Environment Inc · Leonardo Dicaprio Foundation · The Burning 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 Rose Foundation for Communities the Environment funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Rose Foundation for Communities the Environment. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 70%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
  • World Relief Corp of National Association of Evangelicals: 67% of income from government
  • WaterWatch of Oregon: 61% of income from government
  • Wild Salmon Center: 49% of income from government
  • Save the Sound: 37% of income from government
  • Cash Campaign of Maryland Inc: 11% of income from government
  • Third Sector New England Inc: 3% of income from government
  • Lewis & Clark College: 2% of income from government
  • Columbia Riverkeeper: 1% of income from government
  • Western Rivers Conservancy: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
7get no government money at all
73report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to The Rose Foundation for Communities the Environment?

Find your warmest path to The Rose Foundation for Communities the Environment 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 352 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 Rose Foundation for Communities the Environment’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