Skip to content
The Watershed Research & Training Center at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

The Watershed Research & Training Center

To promote healthy communities and sustainable forests through research, education, training and economic development.

$1.4M
Granted FY2025still arriving
35
Grants FY2025still arriving
12
States reached
$98k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2025.

Environment$1.2MPublic Safety & Disaster$469kPublic Benefit$429kEducation$342kArts & Culture$207kCivil Rights$124kPhilanthropy$108kCrime & Legal$99kOther$0
02FY2025 · 35 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k23 grants · $624k
  • $50k–250k10 grants · $753k
$33,357
Median grant
12
States reached
$12M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CONSERVATION CORPS NORTH BAY$97,858
CIVICORPS$91,919
DOVETAIL PARTNERS$90,796
THE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD$83,364
WASHINGTON RC & DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL$80,000
GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARK CONSERVAN$76,382
SHASTA VALLEY RCD$63,953
SOUTHERN CA MOUNTAIN FOUNDATION$59,227
NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY$57,356
UNIVERSITY OF CA DAVIS$52,118
PLUMAS CORPORATION$48,859
HAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT ORG$46,282
THE WESTERN CENTER INC$44,990
CONSERVATION CORPS OF LONG BEACH$37,625
LA CONSERVATION CORPS$37,128
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY22–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 79% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO: $36k → 16%DOVETAIL PARTNERS: $91k → 11%VENTURA COUNTY RCD: $65k → 10%CIVICORPS: $92k → 10%GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARK CONSERVAN: $76k → 10%LA JOLLA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS: $46k → 11%PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL INC: $110k → 13%TUOLUMNE COUNTY RCD: $79k → 14%SOUTHERN CA MOUNTAIN FOUNDATION: $59k → 14%CONSERVATION CORPS OF LONG BEACH: $38k → 14%AMERICAN INDIAN COUNCIL OF MARIPOSA: $42k → 15%SHASTA VALLEY RCD: $66k → 16%CALIFORNIA INDIAN BASKETWEAVERS': $49k → 16%TRIBAL ECO RESORATION ALLIANCE: $36k → 17%ANDERSON VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICES: $29k → 18%HAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT ORG: $60k → 15%THE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD: $83k → 12%USDA FOREST SERVICE: $25k → 14%CITY OF ASHLAND: $27k → 13%NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY: $57k → 8%WILDFIRE ADAPTED PARTNERSHIP: $64k → 12%BOULDER COUNTY: $34k → 12%WASHINGTON RC & DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $80k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO: $33k → 16%DOVETAIL PARTNERS: $25k → 11%OAEC: $37k → 9%VENTURA COUNTY RCD: $29k → 10%PLUMAS CORPORATION: $49k → 13%SOUTHERN CA MOUNTAIN FOUNDATION: $48k → 14%CONSERVATION CORPS OF LONG BEACH: $30k → 14%SHASTA VALLEY RCD: $64k → 16%HAWAII WILDFIRE: $50k → 15%THE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD: $36k → 12%NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY: $54k → 8%WASHINGTON RC&D: $30k → 17%OCCIDENTAL ARTS & ECOLOGY CENTER: $27k → 9%PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL INC: $26k → 13%THE WESTERN CENTER INC: $45k → 14%KARUK TRIBE: $29k → 16%BUTTE COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION: $92k → 18%HAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT ORG: $46k → 15%ROUND VALLEY INDIAN TRIBES: $95k → 18%BUTTE COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION: $35k → 18%CONSERVATION CORPS NORTH BAY: $118k → 9%SALMON RIVER RESTORATION COUNCIL: $28k → 16%CONSERVATION CORPS NORTH BAY: $98k → 9%SCOTT RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL: $27k → 16%CONSERVATION CORPS NORTH BAY: $28k → 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

WA
ID
MT
MN
OR
SD
NJ
CA
CO
VA
AZ
NM
NC
DC
HI
GA
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.

73%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.3M · 26 repeat orgs$866k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +30% since the first grant, against +12% for those funded once.

26 repeat relationships: 19 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
12

Total granted

$2.3M
$327k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+30%
+12%

Still filing today

54%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 59% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $539k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentPublic Safety & DisasterYouth DevelopmentEmploymentPhilanthropyArts & CultureOther
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

  • CC
    CONSERVATION CORPS NORTH BAY INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $274k · revenue +30%
  • PC
    PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $158k · revenue +99%
  • HW
    HAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION
    3× · 2022–2025 · $156k · revenue +652%

Funded once

  • RV
    ROUND VALLEY INDIAN TRIBES
    one grant, 2024 · $95k
  • NS
    NC STATE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2024 · $54k
  • LJ
    LA JOLLA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS
    one grant, 2023 · $46k
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
Central Sierra Environmental Resource Center Inc

CSERC protects water, wildlife, and wild places of the Northern Yosemite region.

Unclassified
2
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
3
Tuolumne River Preservation Trust dba Yosemite Rivers Alliance

At Yosemite Rivers Alliance, we unite conservation and community to protect and restore the three rivers that ?ow through the Yosemite Regionthe Tuolumne, Stanislaus, and Merced.

—
4
Idaho Forest Restoration Partnership
Environment
5
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
6
California Wildlife Foundation

The foundation works with diverse groups representing many interests to acquire and restore critical wildlife habitat and protecting species

Animals
7
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
8
Siskiyou Land Conservancy

The Siskiyou Land Conservancy is a state and federally approved non-profit organization that assists landowners who want to protect the natural values of their land, either through purchase or establishment of conservation easements.

Environment
9
Eastern Madera County Fire Safe Council Inc

Planning and participation in activities to increase safety and reduce fire hazards in the Eastern Madera County area.

Public Safety & Disaster
10
Santa Clara River Conservancy

The Santa Clara River Conservancy represents the diverse interests of the Santa Clara River, from the flood plain to the highest tributaries, and seeks to secure, sustain, and manage significant lands and waters that provide habitat for…

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
California Association of Resource Conservation Districts

To advane the conservation and orderly development of Land, Water, and other natural resources in California and to create statewide awareness of the urgency for conserving and developing California's natural resources

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mid Klamath Watershed Council; the most unlike its peers is Plumas County Fire Safe Council Inc. 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

27 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. 27 of the 54 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)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
27/27
Grantees still filing
17/27
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SHASTA VALLEY RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $141,522 · OtherSHASTA VALLEY RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICTBUTTE COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION: $126,569 · OtherBUTTE COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATIONUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS: $116,675 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVISTUOLUMNE COUNTY RCD: $112,696 · OtherTUOLUMNE COUNTY RCDVENTURA COUNTY RCD: $99,338 · OtherVENTURA COUNTY RCDROUND VALLEY INDIAN TRIBES: $95,353 · OtherROUND VALLEY INDIAN TRIBESREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO: $69,205 · OtherCITY OF ASHLAND: $66,202 · OtherNORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY: $57,356 · OtherNC STATE UNIVERSITY: $53,897 · OtherAmerican Indian Council of Mariposa County: $52,455 · OtherPLUMAS CORPORATION: $48,859 · Other+17 more: $413,061 · Other+17 moreHAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION: $156,219 · EnvironmentHAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT OR…DOVETAIL PARTNERS INC: $140,796 · EnvironmentDOVETAIL PARTNERS INCWASHINGTON RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT C: $110,000 · EnvironmentWASHINGTON RESOURCE CONSERVAT…SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MOUNTAINS FOUNDATION: $107,696 · EnvironmentSOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MOUNTAINS…Occidental Arts and Ecology Center: $79,798 · EnvironmentOccidental Arts and Ecology C…GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVANCY: $76,382 · EnvironmentGOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARKS CO…Tribal Eco Restoration Alliance: $53,829 · EnvironmentTribal Eco Restoration Allian…+6 more: $118,670 · Environment+6 moreCONSERVATION CORPS NORTH BAY INC: $274,394 · EmploymentCONSERVATIO…LOS ANGELES CONSERVATION CORPS: $65,923 · EmploymentLOS ANGELES…THE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD: $145,345 · Youth DevelopmentTHE FORES…CIVICORPS: $91,919 · Youth DevelopmentCIVICORPSCONSERVATION CORPS OF LONG BEACH: $37,625 · Youth DevelopmentCONSERVAT…PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL INC: $158,388 · PhilanthropyWildfire Adapted Partnership: $88,671 · Public Safety & DisasterSEIGLER SPRINGS COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION: $28,424 · Public Safety & DisasterCope Northern Sonoma County: $22,902 · Public Safety & DisasterISLAND PARK SUSTAINABLE FIRE COMMUN: $8,992 · Public Safety & DisasterCALIFORNIA INDIAN BASKETWEAVERS ASSOCIATION: $55,144 · Arts & CultureChico State Enterprises: $15,663 · Education
Other$1,453,188Environment$843,390Employment$340,317Youth Development$274,889Philanthropy$158,388Public Safety & Disaster$148,989Arts & Culture$55,144Education$15,663

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCONSERVATION CORPS NORTH BAY INC: $274,394 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetPLUMAS COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL INC: $158,388 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetHAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION: $156,219 over 3y, 24% of budgetTHE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD: $145,345 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetDOVETAIL PARTNERS INC: $140,796 over 4y, 8.1% of budgetWASHINGTON RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT C: $110,000 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetSOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MOUNTAINS FOUNDATION: $107,696 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetCIVICORPS: $91,919 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetWildfire Adapted Partnership: $88,671 over 3y, 17% of budgetOccidental Arts and Ecology Center: $79,798 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetGOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVANCY: $76,382 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLOS ANGELES CONSERVATION CORPS: $65,923 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCALIFORNIA INDIAN BASKETWEAVERS ASSOCIATION: $55,144 over 2y, 20% of budgetTribal Eco Restoration Alliance: $53,829 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetAmerican Indian Council of Mariposa County: $52,455 over 2y, 3.3% of budgetPLUMAS CORPORATION: $48,859 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCONSERVATION CORPS OF LONG BEACH: $37,625 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSEIGLER SPRINGS COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION: $28,424 over 2y, 18% of budgetSALMON RIVER RESTORATION COUNCIL: $27,704 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetCope Northern Sonoma County: $22,902 over 1y, 6.5% of budgetChestatee-Chattahoochee Resource Conservation and Development Council Inc: $17,419 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetChico State Enterprises: $15,663 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCultural Fire Management Council: $14,349 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetISLAND PARK SUSTAINABLE FIRE COMMUN: $8,992 over 1y, 13% 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 CONSERVATION CORPS NORTH BAY INC ↗
  • Who funds PLUMAS COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds HAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION ↗
  • Who funds THE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD ↗
  • Who funds DOVETAIL PARTNERS INC ↗
  • Who funds WASHINGTON RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT C ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MOUNTAINS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds CIVICORPS ↗
  • Who funds Wildfire Adapted Partnership ↗
  • Who funds Occidental Arts and Ecology Center ↗
  • Who funds GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds LOS ANGELES CONSERVATION CORPS ↗
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA INDIAN BASKETWEAVERS ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds Tribal Eco Restoration Alliance ↗
  • Who funds American Indian Council of Mariposa County ↗
  • Who funds PLUMAS CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds CONSERVATION CORPS OF LONG BEACH ↗
  • Who funds SEIGLER SPRINGS COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds SALMON RIVER RESTORATION COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds Scott River Watershed Council ↗
  • Who funds Cope Northern Sonoma County ↗

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.

National Fish and Wil…Coalitions & Collabor…Resources Legacy FundNational Forest Found…The Nature ConservancyHumboldt Area Foundat…The California Endowm…California Fire Safe …California Fire Found…First Nations Develop…Bella Vista FoundationBonneville Environmen…
National Fish and Wildlife FoundationDC26.3× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Coalitions & Collaboratives Inc · Resources Legacy Fund · National Forest Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Humboldt Area Foundation · The California Endowment · California Fire Safe Council Inc · California Fire Foundation · First Nations Development Institute · Bella Vista Foundation · Bonneville Environmental 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 Watershed Research & Training Center funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Watershed Research & Training Center. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Watershed Research & Training Center?

    Find your warmest path to The Watershed Research & Training Center 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 54 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Watershed Research & Training Center’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