Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Shearwater Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$57k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$20k
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 2025.

Youth Development$112kEnvironment$106kArts & Culture$100kAnimals$92kEducation$61kHuman Services$53kPhilanthropy$43kHealth$30kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $47k
$12,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JOCOTOCO FOUNDATION$20,000
VILLAGE OF PROMISE$15,000
OUR KIDS INC$12,000
IMPACT AMERICA$5,000
HUNTSVILLE HOSPITAL FOUNDATION$5,000
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 (FY19–25, $53k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%VILLAGE OF PROMISE: $15k → 11%VILLAGE OF PROMISE: $15k → 11%VILLAGE OF PROMISE: $13k → 11%VILLAGE OF PROMISE: $10k → 11%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.
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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$513k · 7 repeat orgs$53k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
5

Total granted

$513k
$53k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+84%
+122%

Still filing today

71%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsHealthEducationHuman ServicesOther
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

  • OK
    OUR KIDS INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $99k · revenue +56%
  • AB
    American Bird Conservancy
    5× · 2020–2024 · $84k · revenue +84%
  • TC
    THE CLIFTON INSTITUTE INC
    3× · 2018–2020 · $75k · revenue +224%

Funded once

  • TC
    THE COMMUNITY FREE CLINIC
    one grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue -29%
  • SH
    SAFE HARBOR YOUTH
    one grant, 2020 · $13k
  • WP
    WORLD PARROT TRUST USA INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $8k · revenue +122%
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
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
2
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
3
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
4
National Audubon Society Inc

We work towards a future where birds thrive across the americas because audubon is a powerful, diverse, and ever-growing force for conservation. (continued on schedule o).

Environment
5
National Aviary in Pittsburgh Inc

To protect and provide for endangered species, to conduct avian research and provide information as a national resource, to provide a recreational and educational experience for the general public and to promote an appreciation of natural…

Animals
6
Wildlife Conservation Society

The wildlife conservation society (wcs) saves wildlife and wild places worldwide through science, conservation action, education, and inspiring people to value nature.

Animals
7
Harrison Avian Research and Conservation Collaborative

Harcc's mission is to be the global resource for investigating the effects of environmental, dietary, and human influences on the long-term sustainability of captive and wild bird populations.

Animals
8
Wild Landscapes Inc

Wild landscapes, inc. (wli) is dedicated to conserving large and connected landscapes globally significant to wildlife and crucial to local communities. our environmental conservation strategy is to empower communities, conservationists,…

Animals
9
One Earth Conservation

Building knowledge, motivation, resilience, and capacity in people, organizations, and communities in the united states and internationally so that they can better cherish and nurture themselves, nature, and other beings. this mission is…

Environment
10
Natura International Inc

Natura International conserves rainforests and other key natural ecosystems and the endangered species they contain through creation of protected areas in collaboration with local governments and communities in Latin America. In this way…

Public Benefit
11
Nature and Culture International

Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.

Environment
12
Harpeth Conservancy

To restore and protect clean water and healthy ecosystems for rivers in tennessee by employing scientific expertise and collaborative relationships to develop, promote, and support broad community stewardship and action.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is World Parrot Trust Usa Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Huntsville Hospital Foundationinc. 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

9 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. 9 of the 14 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JOCOTOCO FOUNDATION: $100,000 · OtherJOCOTOCO FOUNDATIONOUR KIDS INC: $98,593 · OtherOUR KIDS INCTHE CLIFTON INSTITUTE INC: $75,000 · OtherTHE CLIFTON INSTITUTE INCFUNDACION COFIVAL: $42,500 · OtherFUNDACION COFIVALTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $24,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYSAFE HARBOR YOUTH: $13,000 · Other+2 more: $12,000 · OtherAmerican Bird Conservancy: $84,000 · AnimalsAmerican Bird Con…WORLD PARROT TRUST USA INC: $8,000 · AnimalsWORLD PARROT TRUS…Impact America: $60,500 · EducationImpact Amer…VILLAGE OF PROMISE INCORPORATED: $52,500 · Human ServicesVILLAGE O…THE COMMUNITY FREE CLINIC: $20,000 · HealthTHE HUNTSVILLE HOSPITAL FOUNDATIONINC: $10,000 · Health
Other$365,093Animals$92,000Education$60,500Human Services$52,500Health$30,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetOUR KIDS INC: $98,593 over 9y, 0.9% of budgetAmerican Bird Conservancy: $84,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CLIFTON INSTITUTE INC: $75,000 over 3y, 8.5% of budgetImpact America: $60,500 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetVILLAGE OF PROMISE INCORPORATED: $52,500 over 4y, 2.2% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $24,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE COMMUNITY FREE CLINIC: $20,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetTHE HUNTSVILLE HOSPITAL FOUNDATIONINC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWORLD PARROT TRUST USA INC: $8,000 over 1y, 1.2% 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 OUR KIDS INC ↗
  • Who funds American Bird Conservancy ↗
  • Who funds THE CLIFTON INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds Impact America ↗
  • Who funds VILLAGE OF PROMISE INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds THE COMMUNITY FREE CLINIC ↗
  • Who funds THE HUNTSVILLE HOSPITAL FOUNDATIONINC ↗
  • Who funds WORLD PARROT TRUST USA 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.

The Bank of America Charitable Foundation IncNC9.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile 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 Shearwater Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Shearwater Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 14 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Shearwater’s filings →

    More from the funding graph