· Private foundation
The Woods Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k25 grants · $74k
- $10k–50k10 grants · $160k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY | $100,000 |
| STANFORD HOOVER HOUSE | $25,000 |
| CHAMPIONS CLUB | $25,000 |
| SANTA CRUZ WALDORF SCHOOL | $25,000 |
| HOSPICE OF WOOD RIVER VALLEY | $25,000 |
| WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTE | $10,000 |
| THE WOODS INSTITUTE | $10,000 |
| ST TIMOTHY'S SCHOOL | $10,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $10,000 |
| PRECOURT DIRECTOR'S DISCRETIONARY FUND | $10,000 |
| STANFORD LIVE | $10,000 |
| SUN VALLEY WRITER'S CONFERENCE | $8,000 |
| SUN VALLEY MUSIC FESTIVAL | $6,000 |
| PARTNERS IN HEALTH NETWORK INC | $5,000 |
| WOOD RIVER LAND TRUST | $5,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY18–25, $14k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 71% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +48% since the first grant, against +39% for the ones you funded once.
47 repeat relationships — 34 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- WCWildlife Conservation Society2× · 2023–2025 · $313k · revenue +16%
- TCTHE COMMUNITY LIBRARY INC7× · 2018–2025 · $155k · revenue +84%
- WHWOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION7× · 2018–2025 · $78k · revenue +69%
Funded once
- RLRESOURCES LEGACY FUNDone grant, 2024 · $200k · revenue 0%
- NFNATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue +69%
- HHHOOVER HOUSE CIRCLEone grant, 2018 · $25k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
To preserve the unique character and natural resources of harvard.
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
Ilsi is a global, nonprofit federation dedicated to generating and advancing emerging science and groundbreaking research to ensure foods are safe, nutritious and sustainable, and that they improve planetary and human health and well-being…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Conservation Fund a Nonprofit Corporation and the most unlike its peers is The Precourt 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.
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 37 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
43 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. 43 of the 69 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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.
- Who funds Wildlife Conservation Society ↗
- Who funds RESOURCES LEGACY FUND ↗
- Who funds THE COMMUNITY LIBRARY INC ↗
- Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION ↗
- Who funds BONEFISH & TARPON TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds SANTA CRUZ WALDORF SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds SUN VALLEY SKI EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PENINSULA OPEN SPACE TRUST ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR CLUBHOUSE DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
- Who funds SUN VALLEY WRITERS' CONFERENCE INC ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds WOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds The Precourt Foundation ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds SUN VALLEY SUMMER SYMPHONY INC ↗
- Who funds THE BERKSHIRE SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds CAMPHILL VILLAGE USA INC ↗
- Who funds The Compassionate Friends Inc ↗
- Who funds THE VACLAV HAVEL LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE SECOND STAGE THEATRE INC ↗
- Who funds MONTEREY BAY AQUARIUM FOUNDATION ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Spur Community Foundation Inc · Heinz Family Foundation · Idaho Community Foundation Inc · Boswell Family Foundation · The Bessemer Giving Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · Network for Good
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 Woods Foundation 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.
- Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution — 63% of income from government
- Vista Life Innovations Inc — 33% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- The Marion Institute Inc — 1% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Woods Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Woods Foundation 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.