· Public charity
Trout Unlimited Inc
To conserve, protect, and restore north america's coldwater fisheries and their watersheds.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k2 grants · $14k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $102k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $572k
- $250k+1 grant · $408k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UINTA COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT | $408,000 |
| CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE COLVILLE RESERVATION | $160,000 |
| THE UPPER SAN JUAN WATERSHED ENHANCEMENT PARTNERSHIP | $133,491 |
| CASCADIA CONSERVATION DISTRICT | $100,000 |
| WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION | $96,566 |
| CLALLAM COUNTY | $82,000 |
| TOWN OF COLEBROOK | $40,996 |
| UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY | $33,167 |
| KLAMATH WATERSHED PARTNERSHIP | $16,780 |
| KACHEMAK HERITAGE LAND TRUST | $10,565 |
| NATIVE VILLAGE OF EKLUTNA | $9,167 |
| SUSTAINABLE NORTHWEST | $5,080 |
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 (FY22–22, $9k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, 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.
31 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 25 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
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, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $324k 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
- CTCOLORADO TROUT UNLIMITED5× · 2017–2023 · $144k · revenue +148%
- TUTROUT UNLIMITED MIANUS CHAPTER4× · 2018–2023 · $137k · revenue +112% · 47% of their budget
- SCSageland Collaborative3× · 2020–2024 · $104k · revenue +127%
Funded once
- YFYES FOR RESPONSIBLE MININGone grant, 2018 · $572k
- NCNORTHERN COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICTone grant, 2023 · $317k
- NCNorthern Colorado Waterone grant, 2017 · $250k
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 conserve, protect and restore North America's coldwater fisheries and their watersheds.
To conserve, protect and restore montana's coldwater fisheries and watersheds.
To conserve, protect, and restore north america's coldwater fisheries and their watersheds.
Trout Unlimited, Clackamas River Chapter seeks to restore habitat and improve water quality for fish and people. We do this by providing project management services to agencies in our chapter area. We also seek to educate youth and adults…
Conserve, protect, reconnet, restore and sustain coldwater fisheries and their watersheds in the geographic area of the the council.
To conserve functioning salmon/steelhead eco-system at watershed levels, integrate angling activities with basic scientific research, collect raw data, monitor environmental functions, salmon/steelhead population dynamics, public…
The Idaho Wildlife Federation (IWF) promotes the conservation of Idaho's wildlife heritage and legacy of sporting opportunities for the current and future generations.
The henry's fork foundation is the only organization who's sole purpose is to conserve, protect and restore the unique fisheries, wildlife and aesthetic qualities of the henry's fork and it's watershed. specifically, hff works diligently…
Caltrout's mission is ensuring healthy water and resilient wild fish for a better california. we share a common vision of a california where healthy waters flow from headwaters to sea. where the diversity and resilience of our waters and…
Upper missouri waterkeeper protects fishable, swimmable, drinkable water throughout the 25,000 square miles of montana's upper missouri river basin of montana. to accomplish this mission we actively engage with citizens, stakeholders and…
Wwt's mission is to protect and restore water in rivers and streams across washington state. washington water trust restores and protects water in rivers and streams and promotes sustainable freshwater management in washington, and, more…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Colorado Trout Unlimited and the most unlike its peers is Cascadia Conservation Trust. 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 54 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 6% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% 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.
50 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 50 of the 135 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 COMPLETE THE LOOP COALITION ↗
- Who funds CASCADIA CONSERVATION TRUST ↗
- Who funds COLORADO TROUT UNLIMITED ↗
- Who funds CASCADE COLUMBIA FISHERIES ENHANCEMENT GROUP ↗
- Who funds TROUT UNLIMITED MIANUS CHAPTER ↗
- Who funds UPPER SAN JUAN WATERSHED ENHANCEMENT PARTNERSHIP ↗
- Who funds Sageland Collaborative ↗
- Who funds University of Nevada Reno Foundation ↗
- Who funds WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds WEBER PATHWAYS ↗
- Who funds DONEGAL CHAPTER TROUT UNLIMITED ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds THEODORE ROOSEVELT CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES FOUNDATION OF ↗
- Who funds CEDAR FUND OF THE CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE COLVILLE RESERVATION ↗
- Who funds KLAMATH WATERSHED PARTNERSHIP BILL LEHMAN ↗
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: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Resources Legacy Fund · The Conservation Fund a Nonprofit Corporation · Patagoniaorg · Pennsylvania Trout Inc · American Rivers Inc · Bass Pro Shops & Cabelas Outdoor Fund · National Wildlife Federation · National Forest Foundation · Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated · Windward Fund
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 Trout Unlimited Inc 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.
- Klamath Watershed Partnership Bill Lehman — 100% of income from government
- Sustainable Northwest — 5% 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.