Skip to content
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

$683k
Granted FY2024still arriving
14
Grants FY2024still arriving
11
States reached
$368k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2024.

Environment$5.0M
02FY2024 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 14 grants below total $637,100, the rows itemized in this filing. The $683,444 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $46,344 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 $10k5 grants · $37k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $133k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
  • $250k+1 grant · $368k
$18,000
Median grant
11
States reached
$71M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS$367,500
THE PARTNERSHIP PROJECT INC$100,000
BLUEGREEN ALLIANCE FOUNDATION$25,000
GREATER CLEVELAND CONGREGATIONS$25,000
GREENLATINOS$20,000
GREEN 20$20,000
MEMPHIS COMMUNITY AGAINST POLLUTION$18,000
CITIZENS UTILITY BOARD OF OHIO$15,000
HEALTHY CLIMATE WISCONSIN INC$10,000
GREENROOTS INC$8,100
EVNOIRE$7,500
LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND$7,500
UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK FOUNDATION INC$7,500
INTERFAITH CENTER ON CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY$6,000
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 (FY22–23, $225k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, 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%HARAMBEE HOUSE INC: $125k → 16%POOR PEOPLE'S CAMPAIGN: $75k → 17%HARAMBEE HOUSE INC: $25k → 16%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
NH
MN
WI
MI
NY
MA
OH
NJ
CA
CO
MD
KS
TN
SC
DC
LA
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.

61%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.0M · 14 repeat orgs$2.0M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +17% since the first grant, against +8% for those funded once.

14 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
26

Total granted

$3.0M
$1.9M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+17%
+8%

Still filing today

93%
96%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $57k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24
EnvironmentEducationHuman ServicesArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementCivil RightsOther
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

  • SA
    SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $1.7M · revenue +53%
  • HH
    Harambee House Inc
    2× · 2022–2023 · $150k · revenue +17%
  • NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $109k · revenue +34%

Funded once

  • SP
    Solutions Project Incgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $850k · revenue +72%
  • DS
    DEEP SOUTH CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTALgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $150k · revenue +74%
  • ALLIED MEDIA PROJECTS INC
    one grant, 2022 · $127k · revenue -30%
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
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
2
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
3
Nw Energy Coalition

The NW Energy Coalition is an alliance of over 100 environmental, civic, and human service organizations, utilities, and businesses in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia, plus many individual members. The NW Energy…

—
4
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
5
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators

The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.

Education
6
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
7
Clean Energy Group Inc

Clean energy research and advocacy. Clean Energy Group promotes effective clean energy policies, develops low carbon technology innovation strategies and promotes new financial tools to strengthen the economy and stabilize climate change.

Environment
8
Science & Environmental Health Network

In service to communities, the earth and future generations, the science and environmental health network forges science, ethics, and law into tools for action.

Environment
9
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
10
Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice

Greenaction mobilizes community power to win victories that change govenment and corporate policies and practices to protect health and promote environmental, economic and social justice.

Environment
11
Alliance for Climate Transition Inc

ACT leads the just, equitable and rapid transition to a clean energy future and diverse climate economy.

Community Improvement
12
Fresh Energy

Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.

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 Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy. 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

41 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. 41 of the 46 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
41/41
Grantees still filing
24/41
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $1,712,500 · EnvironmentSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INCSolutions Project Inc: $850,000 · EnvironmentSolutions Project IncThe Partnership Project Inc: $360,000 · EnvironmentThe Partnership Project IncALLIANCE FOR AFFORDABLE ENERGY: $155,000 · EnvironmentDEEP SOUTH CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL: $150,000 · Environment+19 more: $975,300 · Environment+19 moreHarambee House Inc: $150,000 · Human ServicesThe Poor Peoples Campaign Inc: $75,000 · Human ServicesALLIED MEDIA PROJECTS INC: $127,000 · Arts & CultureGULLAH GEECHEE ANGEL NETWORK: $35,350 · Arts & CultureCLEANAIRNOW ASSOCIATION: $50,000 · OtherBoard of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Jr Univ: $20,000 · OtherMEMPHIS COMMUNITY AGAINST POLLUTION INC: $18,000 · OtherWEST MICHIGAN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION COUNCIL EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $15,000 · OtherTIDES ADVOCACY: $15,000 · OtherRocky Mountain Institute: $8,973 · OtherEVNOIRE: $7,500 · OtherWECOUNT: $25,000 · OtherWABANAKI YOUTH IN SCIENCE INC: $20,827 · Other+2 more: $11,100 · OtherThe Trustees of Princeton University: $50,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE FOUNDATION INCORPORATED: $16,000 · Education4 Venir Inc: $12,708 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK FOUNDATION INC: $7,500 · EducationMOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER: $52,750 · Community ImprovementNEW ALPHA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $18,000 · Community ImprovementGREATER CLEVELAND CONGREGATIONS INC: $50,000 · Public Benefit
Environment$4,202,800Human Services$225,000Arts & Culture$162,350Other$191,400Education$86,208Community Improvement$70,750Public Benefit$50,000

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 budgetSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $1,712,500 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetSolutions Project Inc: $850,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetThe Partnership Project Inc: $360,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetALLIANCE FOR AFFORDABLE ENERGY: $155,000 over 2y, 3.2% of budgetDEEP SOUTH CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL: $150,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetHarambee House Inc: $150,000 over 2y, 9.8% of budgetWest Harlem Environmental Action Inc: $131,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetALLIED MEDIA PROJECTS INC: $127,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCENTER FOR EARTH ENERGY AND DEMOCRACY: $125,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $109,250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBlueGreen Alliance Foundation: $98,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetCLEAN WATER FUND: $70,950 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetCITIZENS UTILITY BOARD OF OHIO: $65,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetGreen 20: $55,000 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetMOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER: $52,750 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGREATER CLEVELAND CONGREGATIONS INC: $50,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetCLEANAIRNOW ASSOCIATION: $50,000 over 1y, 5.2% of budgetGreenLatinos: $50,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetSOULARDARITY: $50,000 over 1y, 3.9% of budgetThe Trustees of Princeton University: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGREENROOTS INC: $41,100 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetIOWA ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $37,500 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetGULLAH GEECHEE ANGEL NETWORK: $35,350 over 2y, 40% of budget350 NEW HAMPSHIRE: $35,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetJUST TRANSITION ALLIANCE: $25,000 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetWECOUNT: $25,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetTEXAS ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ADVOCACY: $25,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetWABANAKI YOUTH IN SCIENCE INC: $20,827 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetNEW ALPHA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $18,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE FOUNDATION INCORPORATED: $16,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCLEAN ENERGY NH: $15,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetWEST MICHIGAN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION COUNCIL EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetYOUNG GIFTED & GREEN: $15,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget4 Venir Inc: $12,708 over 1y, 9.7% of budgetHEALTHY CLIMATE WISCONSIN INC: $10,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetCLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANCE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRocky Mountain Institute: $8,973 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK FOUNDATION INC: $7,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $7,500 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

Amalgamated Charitabl…United States Energy …Windward FundNatural Resources Def…Environmental Defense…The Partnership Proje…Social and Environmen…Tides FoundationSolutions Project IncMovement Strategy Cen…The Kresge FoundationThe Nature Conservancy
Amalgamated Charitable Foundation IncDC39.7× affinity20 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · United States Energy Foundation · Windward Fund · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated · The Partnership Project Inc · Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc · Tides Foundation · Solutions Project Inc · Movement Strategy Center · The Kresge Foundation · The Nature Conservancy

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
  • The Trustees of Princeton University: 11% of income from government
  • Greenroots Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
11report 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 46 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 Union of Concerned Scientists’ 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