· Public charity
Toxic-Free Future F/K/A Washington Toxics Coalition
As a national leader in environmental health research and advocacy, toxic- free future uses the power of science, education, and activism, to drive strong laws and corporate responsibility that protect the health of all people and the planet.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 9 grants below total $435,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $458,700 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $23,700 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 · FY2024
- $10k–50k8 grants · $240k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $195k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CLEAN WATER FUND | $195,000 |
| CLEAN AND HEALTHY NEW YORK | $45,000 |
| VERMONT NATURAL RESOURCES COUNCIL | $35,000 |
| VERMONT PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH & | $35,000 |
| ECOLOGY CENTER | $30,000 |
| DEFEND OUR HEALTH | $30,000 |
| OREGON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL | $25,000 |
| BREAST CANCER PREVENTION PARTNERS | $25,000 |
| NORTH CAROLINA CONSERVATION NETWORK | $15,000 |
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 (FY18–19, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +11% since the first grant, against -19% for the ones you funded once.
17 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2024, 8 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 FY2024, 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
- CACLEAN AND HEALTHY NEW YORK7× · 2017–2024 · $281k · revenue +65%
- ECECOLOGY CENTER8× · 2017–2024 · $237k · revenue +70%
- ACALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION ON TOXICS7× · 2017–2023 · $196k · revenue +208%
Funded once
- CCCONSERVATION COLORADOone grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue -19%
- CCCT COALITION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICEone grant, 2017 · $8k
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.
To safeguard the public from health hazards that impact families, workers, and the environment
Environmental Law Foundation's (ELF) mission is to protect the environment, communities, and consumers against harmful toxics and other environmental harms. Our work consistently improves environmental quality for those most at risk by…
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…
The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.
Conservation law foundation, inc. (clf) protects new england's environment for the benefit of all people and future generations. we use the law, science, and markets to create solutions that preserve and restore our natural resources,…
As a national leader in environmental health research and advocacy, toxic- free future uses the power of science, education, and activism, to drive strong laws and corporate responsibility that protect the health of all people and the…
Clean water action is a national citizens organization working for clean, safe, and affrodable water, prevention of health threatening pollution, creation of environmentally safe jobs and busnesses and empowerment of people to make…
Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.
The organization's mission is to advocate for policy that meets the scale and urgency of our environmental challenges. as a massachusetts-based organization that engages in advocacy across a full spectrum of climate, environmental, and…
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…
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Conservation Colorado and the most unlike its peers is Bma Tenpoint Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
18 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. 18 of the 19 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 CLEAN WATER FUND ↗
- Who funds CLEAN AND HEALTHY NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds ECOLOGY CENTER ↗
- Who funds DEFEND OUR HEALTH ↗
- Who funds ALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION ON TOXICS ↗
- Who funds VERMONT NATURAL RESOURCES COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds VERMONT PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH & EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Oregon Environmental Council ↗
- Who funds NORTH CAROLINA CONSERVATION NETWORK ↗
- Who funds MARYLAND PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds BREAST CANCER PREVENTION PARTNERS ↗
- Who funds BMA TENPOINT INC ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB ↗
- Who funds American Sustainable Business Council ↗
- Who funds LEARNING DISABILITIES ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds West Harlem Environmental Action Inc ↗
- Who funds Latino Community Fund of Washington State ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION COLORADO ↗
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: Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated · The John Merck Fund · Patagoniaorg · New Venture Fund · The Marisla Foundation · Energy Action Fund · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · United States Energy Foundation · Tides Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · American Endowment 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 Toxic-Free Future F/K/A Washington Toxics Coalition 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Vermont Natural Resources Council Inc — 30% of income from government
- Bma Tenpoint Inc — 7% 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 Toxic-Free Future F/K/A Washington Toxics Coalition?
Find your warmest path to Toxic-Free Future F/K/A Washington Toxics Coalition 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.