· Private foundation
Wallace Genetic Foundation II Inc
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
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
- $10k–50k21 grants · $580k
- $50k–250k32 grants · $2.8M
- $250k+4 grants · $2.5M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NEW VENTURE FUND | $1,525,000 |
| CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES | $410,000 |
| CERES INC | $300,000 |
| WATER ENGINEERS FOR THE AMERICAS | $255,000 |
| SANTA FE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $205,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA | $180,000 |
| MILLENNIUM WATER ALLIANCE | $160,000 |
| DESERT RESEARCH INSTITUTE BOARD OF REGENTS NSHE | $150,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION NETWORK | $125,000 |
| ENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS USA INC | $110,000 |
| H2O FOR LIFE | $105,000 |
| END FUND | $100,000 |
| PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CATHEDRAL FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| NATIONAL CATHOLIC COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| CONSERVATION LANDS FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
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 (FY18–18, $60k) land where the poverty rate runs at 22%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% 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 +42% since the first grant, against +35% for the ones you funded once.
80 repeat relationships — 49 still active in FY2025, 31 since wound down; 5 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, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $310k 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
- CICERES INC8× · 2018–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +101%
- WEWATER ENGINEERS FOR THE AMERICAS8× · 2018–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +316% · 30% of their budget
EARTHJUSTICE7× · 2018–2025 · $900k · revenue +114%
Funded once
- CDCORNELL DOUGLAS FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2019 · $65M · revenue -83% · 88% of their budget
MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $500k · revenue +89%- VOVIRGINIA ORGANIZING INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $250k · revenue +51%
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.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
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…
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
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…
The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
To promote public health, safety, and welfare through the improvement of the quality and quantity of drinking water and the development and furtherance of understanding of the problems relating thereto.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated and the most unlike its peers is Corteva Agriscience 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 33 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
109 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. 109 of the 138 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 CORNELL DOUGLAS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
- Who funds SANTA FE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CERES INC ↗
- Who funds WATER ENGINEERS FOR THE AMERICAS ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds The End Fund Inc ↗
- Who funds THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds THE COLLEGE OF WOOSTER ↗
- Who funds MILLENNIUM WATER ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds THE WALLACE CENTERS OF IOWA ↗
- Who funds ENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS-USAINC ↗
- Who funds WATERAID AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION NETWORK ↗
- Who funds Conservation Lands Foundation ↗
- Who funds Global Health Council ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds VILLAGE HEALTH PARTNERSHIP ↗
- Who funds H2O FOR LIFE ↗
- Who funds US WATER PARTNERSHIP ↗
- Who funds Bread for the World Institute ↗
- Who funds MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN BOARD OF TRUSTEES ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT & TECHNOLOGY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL CATHOLIC COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Family Health International Inc ↗
- Who funds MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA ↗
- Who funds OLD-GROWTH FOREST NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL GREENGRANTS FUND ↗
- Who funds APPALACHIAN VOICES ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds PACIFIC INSTITUTE FOR STUDIES IN DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENT & SECURITY ↗
- Who funds INTERACTION THE AMERICAN COUNCIL FOR VOLUNTARY INT'L ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds VIRGINIA ORGANIZING INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION ↗
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: Wallace Genetic Foundation Inc · Patagoniaorg · Gates Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · Cornell Douglas Foundation Inc · New Venture Fund · The Rockefeller Foundation · Conrad N Hilton Foundation · Farvue Foundation Inc · Wellsprings Family Foundation · Clif Family Foundation · The Marisla 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 Wallace Genetic Foundation II 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.
- Nature Forward — 32% of income from government
- Anacostia Watershed Society Inc — 15% of income from government
- Northeast Wilderness Trust Corporation — 2% of income from government
- Friends of the Public Garden Inc — 1% of income from government
- The Epiphany School Inc — 0% of income from government
- Ceres Inc — 0% of income from government
- Portland State University Foundation — 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 Wallace Genetic Foundation II Inc?
Find your warmest path to Wallace Genetic Foundation II Inc 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.