Skip to content
Water Environment Federation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Water Environment Federation

WEF's mission is inspiring the water community in pursuit of human and environmental well-being.

$302k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$40k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Environment$828kScience & Tech$131kCivil Rights$12kPublic Safety & Disaster$7k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $145,985, the rows itemized in this filing. The $302,008 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $156,023 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $132k
$11,036
Median grant
8
States reached
$52M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
US Water Alliance$40,000
Watereuse Association$25,000
Florida WEA$19,000
National Association of Clean Water Agencies$15,999
Virginia WEA$11,036
NC One Water$10,500
Alabama's WEA$10,450
WEA of Texas$7,500
Louisiana Green Corps Inc$6,500
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:

Its human-services grants (FY18–18, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $7k → 14%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

AK
WA
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
IA
IN
PA
CA
CO
NE
MO
KY
VA
MD
AZ
NC
DC
LA
AL
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $42k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 2 regions, $31k to organizations and $12k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

North America (Canada and Mexico)$27k · 63% · 1 grant · 5 people

Stated purpose: Program Support · Operator Scholarship

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$16k · 37% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: Program Support

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

78%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$759k · 17 repeat orgs$211k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +67% since the first grant, against +9% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
11

Total granted

$759k
$182k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+67%
+9%

Still filing today

100%
82%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentHuman ServicesEmploymentOther
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

  • TW
    THE WATER RESEARCH FOUNDATION
    3× · 2018–2021 · $131k · revenue +62%
  • NA
    NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CLEAN WATER AGENCIES
    8× · 2017–2025 · $128k · revenue +62%
  • UW
    US WATER ALLIANCE
    5× · 2017–2025 · $120k · revenue +223%

Funded once

  • WE
    Water Environment & Reuse Foundation
    one grant, 2017 · $76k
  • AW
    AZ WATER ASSOCIATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $15k · revenue +39%
  • IW
    IOWA WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2024 · $15k · revenue 0%
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
American Water Works Association North Carolina Section

Dedicated to providing water education, training and leadership to protect public health and the environment.

Public Benefit
2
California Water Environment Association

To empower, educate, and connect water professionals to protect public health and the environment.

Environment
3
Hawaii Water Environment Association

To promote education and information on issues affecting the water environment in hawaii.

Environment
4
Alaska Water Wastewater Management Association (Awwma)

AWWMA works to provide opportunities that bring knowledge, expertise, and technology to water and wastewater industry professionals in Alaska. Our conferences and workshops are attended by a diverse group of professionals from large and…

Environment
5
American Water Resources Association

Provide its members and the general public with activities, programs and services that facilitate the advancement of water resources research, planning, development, management and education.

Environment
6
American Water Works Association Southwest Section Inc

To advance knowledge and share information regarding the drinking waterindustry.

Public Benefit
7
Georgia Association of Water Professionals

The georgia association of water professionals educates, provides professional development and promotes sound public policy in the water resources and related environmental fields.

Environment
8
American Water Works Association Alabama-Mississippi Section

Advancement and dissemination of knowledge concerning the water works industry.

Public Benefit
9
American Water Works Association

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.

Public Benefit
10
Colorado Rural Water Association

To provide professional training, technical assistance and representation to rural and small communities as they endeavor to maintain standards, meet regulatory deadlings and attain multi-level certifications of their water and wastewater…

—
11
Minnesota Section American Water Works Association

The american water works association is an international nonprofit, scientific and educational society dedicated to provide total water solutions assuring the effective management of water. founded in 1881, the association is the largest…

Public Benefit
12
Indiana Section American Water Works Association Inc

Authoritative resource for promoting safe drinking water, public health, safety, and welfare by uniting the efforts of the full spectrum of the drinking water community in the state of indiana. through our collective strength, inawwa…

Public Benefit
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Michigan Water Environment Association; the most unlike its peers is American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches. 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

29 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 29 of the 31 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
13
Early backer (in before they grew)
29/29
Grantees still filing
22/29
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE WATER RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $131,000 · EnvironmentTHE WATER RESEARCH FOUNDATIONUS WATER ALLIANCE: $120,000 · EnvironmentUS WATER ALLIANCENEW YORK WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATION INC: $46,095 · EnvironmentNEW YORK WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATION INCPENNSYLVANIA WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATION: $40,270 · EnvironmentPENNSYLVANIA WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATIONNew England Water Environment Association Inc: $35,000 · EnvironmentWATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATION OF TEXAS INC: $32,000 · EnvironmentALABAMA'S WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATION: $30,210 · EnvironmentNEBRASKA WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSN: $28,400 · EnvironmentILLINOIS WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOC: $23,115 · Environment+15 more: $207,181 · Environment+15 moreNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CLEAN WATER AGENCIES: $128,393 · OtherNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CLEAN …Water Environment & Reuse Foundation: $75,500 · OtherWater Environment & Reuse Foun…WateReuse Association: $40,000 · OtherWateReuse AssociationPRW&EA: $12,000 · Other+1 more: $6,667 · OtherLOUISIANA GREEN CORPS INC: $15,000 · EmploymentAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $6,700 · Human Services
Environment$693,271Other$262,560Employment$15,000Human Services$6,700

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE WATER RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $131,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CLEAN WATER AGENCIES: $128,393 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetUS WATER ALLIANCE: $120,000 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetNEW YORK WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATION INC: $46,095 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetPENNSYLVANIA WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATION: $40,270 over 2y, 4.6% of budgetWateReuse Association: $40,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetNew England Water Environment Association Inc: $35,000 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetWATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATION OF TEXAS INC: $32,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetALABAMA'S WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATION: $30,210 over 4y, 7.4% of budgetNEBRASKA WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSN: $28,400 over 3y, 8.3% of budgetILLINOIS WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOC: $23,115 over 2y, 7.9% of budgetALASKA AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION: $22,275 over 2y, 40% of budgetFLORIDA WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATION INC: $19,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetCENTRAL STATES WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATION INC: $18,750 over 2y, 5.3% of budgetVirginia Water Environment Association Inc: $17,036 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetMICHIGAN WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATION: $16,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetNEVADA WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSN: $15,900 over 2y, 5.3% of budgetAZ WATER ASSOCIATION: $15,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetIOWA WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATION: $15,000 over 1y, 5.6% of budgetLOUISIANA GREEN CORPS INC: $15,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetCLEAN WATER PROFESSIONALS OF KENTUCKY & TENNESSEE: $14,595 over 1y, 8.1% of budgetINDIANA WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOCIATION: $11,815 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetMULTIPLIER: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPACIFIC NORTHWEST POLLUTION CONTROL ASSOCIATION: $7,700 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetRocky Mountain Water Environment Association: $7,500 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $6,700 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetClean Water Institute: $6,667 over 1y, 7.8% of budgetMISSOURI WATER ENVIRONMENT ASSOC: $6,110 over 1y, 1.1% 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.

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.

Jacobs Engineering Fo…Amazonsmile Foundation
Jacobs Engineering FoundationTX24× affinity9 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jacobs Engineering Foundation · Amazonsmile 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 Water Environment Federation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Water Environment Federation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Florida Water Environment Association Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get 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
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
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.

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 31 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 Water Environment Federation’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