Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Public charity

The Trust for Public Land

THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND creates parks and protects land for people, ensuring healthy, livable communities for generations to come.

$152M
Granted FY2025still arriving
95
Grants FY2025still arriving
29
States reached
$2.5M
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
0198% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.

Environment$24MRecreation & Sports$13MAnimals$7.1MPublic Benefit$3.7MArts & Culture$2.7MCommunity Improvement$2.3MPhilanthropy$2.2MEducation$1.6MOther$0
02FY2025 · 95 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 95 grants below total $10,501,337 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $151,592,318 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $141,090,981 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k8 grants · $59k
  • $10k–50k49 grants · $1.1M
  • $50k–250k29 grants · $3.0M
  • $250k+9 grants · $6.4M
$30,000
Median grant
29
States reached
$433M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MOST WORSHIPFUL PRINCE HALL GRAND LODGE OF GEORGIA$2,525,000
YES ON PROP 4 CALIFORNIANS FOR SAFE DRINKING WATER & WILDFIRE$1,142,174
PATAWOMECK INDIAN TRIBE OF VA$1,072,000
WAIPA FOUNDATION$319,187
COBB COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION$305,026
CITY OF CONCORD$275,982
EAST CLEVELAND CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION$275,000
OJAI VALLEY LAND CONSERVANCY$251,272
LAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY$250,000
TREASURER STATE OF MAINE$246,728
YES ON PROP 2 CALIFORNIANS FOR QUALITY SCHOOLS$175,000
ENDAZHI NITAAWIGING$172,749
CALIFORNIA RANGELAND TRUST$171,920
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK$150,000
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO 286 BROOKLYN CENTER$131,345
02The need
03

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:

Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $474k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 76% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%THE LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY GARDEN COUNCIL: $28k → 14%LEXINGTON FAYETTE URBAN COUNTY: $24k → 15%HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF DISTRICT IX: $9k → 10%CENTER FOR FAMILY SERVICES INC: $40k → 12%URBAN LEAGUE OF ESSEX COUNTY: $25k → 16%SOUTHEAST ASIAN MAA COALITION INC: $100k → 22%CITIZENS FOR COLORADO SPRINGS: $10k → 9%FOR OAK CLIFF: $10k → 14%THE NET RESOURCE FOUNDATION: $63k → 12%NET RESOURCE FOUNDATION: $6k → 12%SOMALI HEALTH BOARD: $20k → 9%LATINO COMMUNITY FUND OF WASHINGTON STATE: $63k → 9%SOMALI HEALTH BOARD: $10k → 9%WESTSIDE FUTURE FUND: $39k → 13%WESTSIDE FUTURE FUND INC: $15k → 13%YMCA OF METROPOLITAN ATLANTA INC: $13k → 13%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 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

ME
VT
NH
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
WY
SD
IA
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
CO
MO
KY
WV
VA
MD
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
DC
HI
LA
MS
AL
GA
TX
FL

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.

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.

57%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$31M · 92 repeat orgs$23M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +30% since the first grant, against +14% for the ones you funded once.

92 repeat relationships — 30 still active in FY2025, 62 since wound down; 64 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

92
205

Total granted

$31M
$14M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+30%
+14%

Still filing today

83%
66%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 15% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8.9M 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
EnvironmentCommunity ImprovementRecreation & SportsEducationHuman ServicesArts & CultureOther

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

  • RM
    ROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $7.0M · revenue +62%
  • AK
    ALA KAHAKAI TRAIL ASSOCIATION
    4× · 2020–2023 · $1.9M · revenue +10%
  • MH
    MALAMA HULEIA
    2× · 2022–2025 · $700k · revenue +7%

Funded once

  • RA
    RIVERS AND MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY
    one grant, 2023 · $2.0M
  • CO
    CITY OF JOHNS CREEK
    one grant, 2018 · $1.0M
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF HAWAII VOLCANOES NATIONAL PARK
    one grant, 2023 · $800k · revenue +11% · 100% of their budget

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
Whatcom Land Trust

The mission of the Whatcom Land Trust is to preserve and protect wildlife habitat, scenic, agricultural and open space lands in Whatcom County for future generations by securing interests in land and promoting land stewardship.

Environment
2
Land Conservancy of West Michigan

Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…

Environment
3
Oregon Agricultural Trust

Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.

Environment
4
Conservation Legacy

Conservation legacy engages future leaders who protect, restore, and enhance our nation's lands through community-based service.in 2024, conservation legacy engaged 2,524 participants who completed over 1.5 million service hours on public…

Youth Development
5
Wildlands Trust Inc

The wildlands trust works throughout southeastern massachusetts to conserve and permanently protect native habitats, farmland, and lands of high ecologic and scenic value that serve to keep our communities healthy and our residents…

Environment
6
Northern California Regional Land Trust

The purpose of the organization is to monitor, manage, and preserve conservation easements it stewards in northern california. the organization acquires conservation easements in land exhibiting important natural features to protect and…

Environment
7
Native Plant Trust Inc

The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.

Environment
8
Public Land Solutions

Public land solutions is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing comprehensive recreation planning and stakeholder coordination to support effective and sustainable public land solutions.

Environment
9
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
10
The Land Trust for Tennessee Inc

To conserve the unique character of tennessee's natural and historic landscapes and sites for future generations.

Environment
11
Wallowa Land Trust

Our mission is to protect the rural nature of Wallowa County by working cooperatively with private landowners,indigenous people, local communities and governmental entities to conserve land.

Environment
12
Deschutes Land Trust

To preserve and enhance natural ecosystems, scenic areas, open spaces, fish and wildlife habitat within deschutes basin.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New Canaan Land Conservation Trust Inc and the most unlike its peers is Expedition Foundation. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyEnvironmental Conservation …School District FoundationsChild Abuse Advocacy Servic…Policy Research and AdvocacyLocal History MuseumsYouth Development CentersWomen & Girls Leadership De…Local Food System Organizat…Ymca Youth DevelopmentPublic Library OperationsFaith-Based Social ServicesAffordable Housing Developm…Immigrant Worker SupportCommunity FoundationsCommunity Arts CentersCommunity Foundations
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 28 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%5%<5yr14%12%5–10yr19%19%10–20yr16%27%20–35yr13%25%35–55yr16%13%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%4%<5yr14%7%5–10yr19%16%10–20yr16%18%20–35yr13%37%35–55yr16%17%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
1%4/373
the rest of the field
13%
240,392/1,819,192

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.

04the grantee network

282 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. 282 of the 369 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.

16
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
86
Early backer (in before they grew)
276/282
Grantees still filing
171/282
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

THE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $4,774,314 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYCLEVELAND METROPARKS — $4,758,049 · OtherCLEVELAND METROPARKSMOST WORSHIPFUL PRINCE HALL GR LODGE FREE & ACCEPTED MASONS — $2,525,000 · OtherMOST WORSHIPFUL PRINCE HALL GR LODGE FREE & ACCEPTED MASONSRIVERS AND MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY — $2,000,000 · OtherRIVERS AND MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCYIndividual grant recipient — $1,700,000 · OtherTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND ACTION FUND — $1,642,987 · Other+103 more — $14,942,649 · Other+103 moreALA KAHAKAI TRAIL ASSOCIATION — $1,945,000 · EnvironmentALA KAHAKAI TRAIL AS…CALIFORNIANS FOR SAFE DRINKING WATER AND WILDFIRE PREVENTION — $1,142,174 · EnvironmentCALIFORNIANS FOR SAF…OREGON RANGELAND TRUST — $969,642 · EnvironmentOREGON RANGELAND TRU…Coastal Corridor Alliance — $500,000 · EnvironmentLivable Hawaii Kai Hui — $470,894 · EnvironmentFLATHEAD LAND TRUST — $401,500 · EnvironmentLos Angeles Neighborhood Land Trust — $400,000 · EnvironmentTHE OJAI VALLEY LAND CONSERVANCY — $351,272 · EnvironmentThe Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust — $341,508 · Environment+42 more — $3,664,928 · Environment+42 moreROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK FOUNDATION INC — $6,980,000 · AnimalsROCKY MOUNTAI…+1 more — $96,375 · AnimalsPatawomeck Indian Tribe of Virginia Inc — $1,072,000 · Arts & CultureFRIENDS OF HAWAII VOLCANOES NATIONAL PARK — $800,000 · Arts & CultureHUNTER CREEK HISTORICAL FOUNDATION — $137,418 · Arts & CultureCLEMMONS FAMILY FARM INC — $100,000 · Arts & Culture+5 more — $310,000 · Arts & CultureCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION SANTA CRUZ COUNTY — $1,425,000 · PhilanthropyMaine Community Foundation Inc — $355,455 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES — $200,000 · PhilanthropyPIKES PEAK COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $166,000 · PhilanthropyKERN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $100,000 · Philanthropy+3 more — $156,300 · PhilanthropyMALAMA HULEIA — $700,325 · Community ImprovementNEW COVENANT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $162,760 · Community ImprovementGROUNDWORK BRIDGEPORT INC — $141,250 · Community ImprovementELDERBERRY WISDOM FARM — $112,993 · Community ImprovementKAULUAKALANA — $111,833 · Community ImprovementBOSTON PROJECT MINISTRIES INC — $98,000 · Community ImprovementRise Southeast Elevate — $87,665 · Community ImprovementGROUNDWORK DENVER INC — $82,293 · Community Improvement+8 more — $343,358 · Community ImprovementCALIFORNIA RANGELAND TRUST — $387,411 · Food & NutritionCOLORADO CATTLEMEN'S AGRICULTURAL LAND TRUST — $379,000 · Food & NutritionURBAN AGRICULTURE COOPERATIVE — $234,624 · Food & NutritionNEW MEXICO LAND CONSERVANCY — $170,000 · Food & NutritionSAN LUIS VALLEY LOCAL FOODS COALITION — $80,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$32,342,999Environment$10,186,918Animals$7,076,375Arts & Culture$2,419,418Philanthropy$2,402,755Community Improvement$1,840,477Food & Nutrition$1,251,035

Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK FOUNDATION INC — $6,980,000 over 2y, 8.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $4,774,314 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetALA KAHAKAI TRAIL ASSOCIATION — $1,945,000 over 4y, 16% of budgetTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND ACTION FUND — $1,642,987 over 7y, 74% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION SANTA CRUZ COUNTY — $1,425,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetOREGON RANGELAND TRUST — $969,642 over 6y, 100% of budgetFRIENDS OF HAWAII VOLCANOES NATIONAL PARK — $800,000 over 1y, 100% of budgetPACIFIC CREST TRAIL ASSOCIATION — $571,247 over 2y, 12% of budgetWAIPA FOUNDATION — $429,187 over 3y, 6.5% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING FOR KIDS — $405,559 over 3y, 21% of budgetFLATHEAD LAND TRUST — $401,500 over 3y, 5.2% of budgetLos Angeles Neighborhood Land Trust — $400,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetCALIFORNIA RANGELAND TRUST — $387,411 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetCOLORADO CATTLEMEN'S AGRICULTURAL LAND TRUST — $379,000 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetHISTORIC BOSTON INCORPORATED — $370,842 over 2y, 15% of budgetUNITED PARKS AS ONE — $358,351 over 9y, 25% of budgetMaine Community Foundation Inc — $355,455 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE OJAI VALLEY LAND CONSERVANCY — $351,272 over 2y, 4.5% of budgetThe Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust — $341,508 over 3y, 7.0% of budgetLAND STUDIO INC — $330,032 over 2y, 15% of budgetPARK PRIDE INC — $328,478 over 7y, 7.2% of budgetFEATHER RIVER LAND TRUST — $326,025 over 3y, 4.9% of budgetLAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY — $250,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetURBAN AGRICULTURE COOPERATIVE — $234,624 over 4y, 13% of budgetBIG NFP DBA Blacks in Green — $215,246 over 2y, 6.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES — $200,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetLAND TRUST ALLIANCE INC — $196,185 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetINLAND WOODS TRAILS — $193,595 over 2y, 35% of budgetENDAZHI-NITAAWIGING CHARTER SCHOOL — $172,749 over 1y, 5.8% of budgetURBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK — $171,690 over 4y, 1.4% of budgetNEW MEXICO LAND CONSERVANCY — $170,000 over 4y, 5.6% of budgetPIKES PEAK COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $166,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetTEXAS TREES FOUNDATION — $165,000 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetNEW COVENANT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $162,760 over 1y, 24% of budgetBICYCLE COLORADO — $160,000 over 3y, 5.0% of budgetVERMONT HUTS ASSOCIATION LTD — $152,500 over 3y, 33% of budgetMendocino Land Trust — $150,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetGROUNDWORK BRIDGEPORT INC — $141,250 over 4y, 12% of budgetHUNTER CREEK HISTORICAL FOUNDATION — $137,418 over 3y, 37% of budgetSee You At The Top — $115,783 over 1y, 19% of budgetCITY PARKS ALLIANCE INC — $115,000 over 6y, 2.3% of budgetFriends of the Columbia Gorge Land Trust — $110,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetLOWER PHALEN CREEK PROJECT — $110,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetNATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK ASSOCIATION — $103,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetAstoria Park Conservancy — $103,079 over 2y, 26% of budgetCLEMMONS FAMILY FARM INC — $100,000 over 1y, 5.2% of budgetCRAZY HORSE SCHOOL — $100,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetSOUTHEAST ASIAN MUTUAL ASSISTANCE ASSOCIATIONS COALITION INC — $100,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budget
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.

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.

The Nature ConservancyLand Trust Alliance I…National Fish and Wil…Resources Legacy FundNatural Resources Def…PatagoniaorgDavis Conservation Fo…Rei Cooperative Actio…National Recreation a…Gates Family Foundati…The Conservation Fund…The Kresge Foundation
The Nature ConservancyVA57.5× affinity54 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Nature Conservancy · Land Trust Alliance Inc · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · Patagoniaorg · Davis Conservation Foundation · Rei Cooperative Action Fund · National Recreation and Park Association · Gates Family Foundation · The Conservation Fund a Nonprofit Corporation · The Kresge Foundation

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 Trust for Public Land 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
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 42%
  • Groundwork Bridgeport Inc — 100% of income from government
  • New England Forestry Foundation Inc — 88% of income from government
  • Willamette Partnership — 76% of income from government
  • Center for Family Services — 73% of income from government
  • Elderberry Wisdom Farm — 56% of income from government
  • Willamette Riverkeeper — 42% of income from government
  • Vermont Land Trust Inc — 42% of income from government
  • Urban League of Essex County — 20% of income from government
  • Clemmons Family Farm Inc — 9% of income from government
  • Urban Agriculture Cooperative — 2% of income from government
  • In a Landscape — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
56report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
5rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 369 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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