How much did THE WATERSHED RESEARCH & TRAINING grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 51% of THE WATERSHED RESEARCH & TRAINING’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2024 · 29 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k1 grant · $5k
$10k–50k19 grants · $501k
$50k–250k9 grants · $685k

$30,104

Median grant

States reached

$6.8M

Total assets

Largest grants

PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL INC$109,542
ROUND VALLEY INDIAN TRIBES$95,353
BUTTE COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION$91,997
TUOLUMNE COUNTY RCD$78,762
SHASTA VALLEY RCD$65,631
VENTURA COUNTY RCD$64,844
UNIVERSITY OF CA DAVIS$64,557
HAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT ORG$60,000
NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY$53,897
CALIFORNIA INDIAN BASKETWEAVERS'$49,144
SOUTHERN CA MOUNTAIN FOUNDATION$48,469
AMERICAN INDIAN COUNCIL OF MARIPOSA$41,895
OAEC$37,420
UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO$35,848
CONSERVATION CORPS OF LONG BEACH$30,104

02The need

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 (FY22–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13% — the area typically sits at 10%. 77% of your dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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.

70%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$1.3M · 20 repeat orgs$566k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +209% since the first grant, against -23% for the ones you funded once.

20 repeat relationships — 16 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 12 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$1.3M

$121k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+209%

-23%

Still filing today

55%

29%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 63% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $445k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EnvironmentPublic Safety & DisasterEmploymentPhilanthropyArts & CultureYouth DevelopmentOther

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

CC
CONSERVATION CORPS OF LONG BEACH
2× · 2023–2024 · $177k · revenue +120%
PC
PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL INC
2× · 2023–2024 · $132k · revenue +811%
HW
HAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT ORG
2× · 2022–2024 · $110k · revenue +328%

Funded once

LJ
LA JOLLA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS
one grant, 2023 · $46k
WR
WASHINGTON RC&D
one grant, 2022 · $30k · revenue -25%
CO
CITY OF RAPID CITY
one grant, 2023 · $13k

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.

Sierra Foothill Conservancy

Protect, manage and preserve lands and wildlife having unique natural resources and cultural qualities within and near the foothills of the sierra nevada range.

Environment

Roaring Fork Valley Wildfire Collaborative

Our mission is to reduce wildfire risk by identifying, prioritizing, and implementing strategic cross-boundary plans and projects aimed at creating fire-resilient landscapes and fire-adapted communities.

Environment

Community Wildfire Planning Center

Philanthropy

Idaho Forest Restoration Partnership

Environment

West Region Wildfire Council

Increases resilience to wildfire in Delta, Gunnison, Hinsdale, Montrose, Ouray and San Miguel Counties in Colorado

Public Safety & Disaster

Amador Fire Safe Council

Protect the people of amador county and their property from the effects of catastrophic fires through education, cooperation, innovation and action

Public Safety & Disaster

CalWild

CalWild protects our state's drinking water and wild places by seeking new protections for streams and natural areas on public lands. Current campaigns include: the Sierra Forests, NW CA, the Desert, the San Gabriel Mts and the Central…

—

Sonoma Mountain Institute

Environment

Mountain Communities Fire Safe Council

To protect local homes, communities and environment from wildfires

Public Safety & Disaster

Northeast Washington Forestry Coalition

Working collaboratively, the Colville National Forest (CNF) and the Northeast Washington Forestry Coalition (NEWFC) focus on forest restoration, designing innovative stewardship through ecologically sound forest treatments that also…

Environment

Lookout-Glasgow Rangeland Protection Ass

Rangeland Fire Protection

Public Safety & Disaster

Friends of the Anacortes Community Forest Lands

Friends of the Anacortes Community Forest Lands is dedicated to the preservation, care, and enjoyment of the Anacortes Community Forest Lands.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hawaii Wildfire Management and the most unlike its peers is Plumas County Fire Safe Council. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 25 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/38

the rest of the field

12%

22,290/186,940

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

18 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

18/18

Grantees still filing

14/18

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$967,723Environment$341,556Employment$205,331Public Safety & Disaster$136,489Philanthropy$132,166Youth Development$61,981Arts & Culture$55,144

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.

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.

Coalitions & Collaboratives IncCO22.4× affinity8 shared granteesties to 8 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Coalitions & Collaboratives Inc · Resources Legacy Fund · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Ndn Collective Inc · California Fire Foundation · Humboldt Area Foundation · First Nations Development Institute · The California Wellness Foundation · The California Endowment · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Enterprise Holdings 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 organisation THE WATERSHED RESEARCH & TRAINING 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: HAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT ORG.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~10 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 4.3× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 651185517 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 HAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT ORG, 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 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 24% of their budget — diversified.
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 Watershed Research & Training?

Find your warmest path to The Watershed Research & Training 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.

THE WATERSHED RESEARCH & TRAINING

What you funded, over time

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

18 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Watershed Research & Training?

More from the funding graph

THE WATERSHED RESEARCH & TRAINING

What you funded, over time

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

18 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Watershed Research & Training?

More from the funding graph