Skip to content
Waverley Street Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Waverley Street Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$282M
Granted FY2024still arriving
144
Grants FY2024still arriving
20
States reached
$20M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Environment$489MPhilanthropy$97MEducation$82MInternational$67MPublic Benefit$40MFood & Nutrition$29MCommunity Improvement$23MCivil Rights$15MOther$0
02FY2024 · 144 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $50k–250k23 grants · $1.8M
  • $250k+119 grants · $280M
$1,000,000
Median grant
20
States reached
$2.7B
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THOUSAND CURRENTS$20,000,000
CLIMATE IMPERATIVE FOUNDATION$18,000,000
CLIMATE IMPERATIVE FOUNDATION$18,000,000
TIDES FOUNDATION$10,000,000
STICHTING EUROPEAN CLIMATE FOUNDATION$10,000,000
STICHTING FOUNDATION FOR INTERNATIONAL LAW$8,333,334
GRID ALTERNATIVES INC$8,000,000
CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION$7,500,000
POTENTIAL ENERGY COALITION INC$7,000,000
DEEP SOUTH CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE$5,000,000
ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC$5,000,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000,000
WINDWARD FUND$5,000,000
EQUATION CAMPAIGN AND GLOBAL CLIMATE LEGAL DEFENSE$5,000,000
CALIFORNIA VOLUNTEERS FUND$5,000,000
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 (FY20–24, $12.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 84% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%THE HOPI FOUNDATION LOMASUMINAGWTUKWSIUMANI: $160k → 26%LA COSECHA COMMUNITY SUPPORTED AGRICULTURE: $1.3M → 14%HOPI TUTSKWA PERMACULTURE INSTITUTE INC: $50k → 26%LA COSECHA COMMUNITY SUPPORTED AGRICULTURE: $1.3M → 14%PRIME COALITION INC: $1.0M → 8%LA COSECHA COMMUNITY SUPPORTED AGRICULTURE: $1.3M → 14%PRIME COALITION INC: $1.0M → 8%RES PUBLICA US INC: $300k → 17%GLOBAL RESILIENT CITIES NETWORK: $6.0M → 17%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

WA
MT
MN
WI
NY
MA
OR
PA
NJ
CT
CA
CO
NE
WV
VA
MD
AZ
NM
NC
DC
HI
OK
LA
GA
TX
FL
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 11% of Waverley Street Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Waverley Street Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 11% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

80%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$593M · 77 repeat orgs$149M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +23% since the first grant, against -26% for those funded once.

77 repeat relationships: 61 still active in FY2024, 16 since wound down; 57 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

77
44

Total granted

$593M
$88M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+23%
-26%

Still filing today

86%
68%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 75% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $61M went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentEducationInternationalFood & NutritionHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther
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

  • CI
    CLIMATE IMPERATIVE FOUNDATION
    4× · 2021–2024 · $144M · revenue +23%
  • CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION
    5× · 2020–2024 · $53M · revenue +94%
  • TC
    THOUSAND CURRENTS
    3× · 2021–2024 · $40M · revenue +32% · 66% of their budget

Funded once

  • AG
    ASPEN GLOBAL CHANGE INSTITUTE INC
    one grant, 2020 · $41M · revenue -66% · 37% of their budget
  • EE
    ELEMENTAL EXCELERATOR INC
    one grant, 2023 · $7.0M · revenue -5%
  • GR
    GLOBAL RESILIENT CITIES NETWORK
    one grant, 2021 · $6.0M · revenue -70% · 68% of their budget
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
Climate Foundation

To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.

Science & Tech
2
Climate Catalyst Inc

Climate catalyst sparks collective action to tackle the biggest climate challenges we face today: cutting emissions in heavy industries.

Environment
3
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
4
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
5
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
6
E3G Third Generation Environmentalism

E3g is a leading international not-for-profit think tank specialising in climate diplomacy harnessing expertise in the politics and economics of climate change.

Environment
7
Coalition for Green Capital D/B/a American Green Bank Consortium

Cgc operates as a nonprofit financial institution that invests directly and through partners to transform financial markets by using public and private investing to accelerate the deployment of projects that strengthen the grid, reduce…

Environment
8
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
9
Center for International Environmental Law Inc

To investigate, research, write, publish, present conferences and teach with respect to global, regional, transboundary, and comparative environmental issues and to make the findings from such activities available to the general public; to…

International
10
Environment Next Inc

Environment next supports individuals, nonprofits and businesses around the world on solutions to complex climate issues. we provide leadership, outreach and communication support, grants, and investments to empower leaders and their ideas…

Environment
11
The Climate Group Inc

Climate group advances climate action by mobilizing business and government leadership to drive systemic decarbonization across energy, transport, and industry, while engaging the public through large-scale convenings and global platforms.…

Environment
12
Common Future

Common future is a network of pioneering leaders across the u.s. and canada who work deeply within their communities to create alternative approaches to business, philanthropy, and investing. we envision an economy that has transitioned…

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Prime Coalition Inc; the most unlike its peers is Tomkat Ranch Educational Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

136 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 136 of the 189 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.

33
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
136/136
Grantees still filing
65/136
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CLIMATE IMPERATIVE FOUNDATION: $144,000,000 · EnvironmentCLIMATE IMPERATIVE FOUNDATIONCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $53,000,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATIONClean Future Forum Inc: $36,000,000 · EnvironmentClean Future Forum IncWINDWARD FUND: $32,250,000 · EnvironmentWINDWARD FUNDGLOBAL GREENGRANTS FUND: $22,500,000 · EnvironmentGLOBAL GREENGRANTS FUND+30 more: $101,899,998 · Environment+30 moreSTICHTING EUROPEAN CLIMATE FOUNDATION: $20,000,000 · OtherSTICHTING EUROPEAN CLIMATE FO…GRID ALTERNATIVES INC: $16,000,000 · OtherGRID ALTERNATIVES INCSELCO FOUNDATION: $12,000,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $10,000,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $10,000,000 · OtherSTICHTING FOUNDATION FOR INTERNATIONAL LAW: $8,333,334 · OtherFUSE Corps: $10,500,000 · OtherCALIFORNIA VOLUNTEERS FUND: $10,000,000 · Other+91 more: $129,209,057 · Other+91 moreASPEN GLOBAL CHANGE INSTITUTE INC: $41,000,000 · EducationASPEN GLOBA…THE MALALA FUND: $11,000,000 · EducationTHE MALALA …The New School: $8,400,000 · EducationThe New Sch…NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES INSTITUTE INC: $6,800,000 · EducationNATIONAL LE…TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIO: $5,000,000 · EducationTEXAS SOUTH…RESULTS FOR AMERICA: $3,000,000 · Education+11 more: $11,798,100 · Education+11 moreROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $27,500,000 · PhilanthropyROCKEFELLER…TIDES FOUNDATION: $23,000,000 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUND…Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc: $18,000,000 · PhilanthropyAmalgamated…Silicon Valley Community Foundation: $5,000,000 · PhilanthropySilicon Val…EQUATION CAMPAIGN AND GLOBAL CLIMATE LEGAL DEFENSE: $5,000,000 · PhilanthropyEQUATION CA…+8 more: $7,280,000 · Philanthropy+8 moreTHOUSAND CURRENTS: $40,000,000 · InternationalROOT CAPITAL INC: $11,000,000 · InternationalAVINA AMERICAS INC: $2,000,000 · InternationalGLOBAL FAIRNESS INITIATIVE: $2,000,000 · International+6 more: $3,400,000 · InternationalCULTURAL SURVIVAL INC: $6,500,000 · Civil RightsTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER: $5,000,000 · Civil RightsTHE CHISHOLM LEGACY PROJECT INC: $3,000,000 · Civil RightsEARTHRIGHTS INTERNATIONAL INC: $1,750,000 · Civil RightsJUST ASSOCIATES INC: $1,000,000 · Civil RightsREGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE FOUNDATION: $4,500,000 · Food & NutritionFOUNDATION FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURE RESEARCH: $2,250,000 · Food & NutritionNATIONAL YOUNG FARMERS COALITION INC: $2,100,000 · Food & NutritionNational Black Food and Justice Alliance: $2,000,000 · Food & NutritionSOUL FIRE FARM INSTITUTE INC: $2,000,000 · Food & NutritionFOODCORPS INC: $1,500,000 · Food & NutritionIDEAGARDEN INSTITUTE INCORPORATED: $1,100,000 · Food & NutritionKITCHEN TABLE ADVISORS: $600,000 · Food & Nutrition+2 more: $450,000 · Food & Nutrition
Environment$389,649,998Other$226,042,391Education$86,998,100Philanthropy$85,780,000International$58,400,000Civil Rights$17,250,000Food & Nutrition$16,500,000

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 budgetCLIMATE IMPERATIVE FOUNDATION: $144,000,000 over 4y, 17% of budgetCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $53,000,000 over 5y, 13% of budgetASPEN GLOBAL CHANGE INSTITUTE INC: $41,000,000 over 1y, 37% of budgetTHOUSAND CURRENTS: $40,000,000 over 3y, 66% of budgetClean Future Forum Inc: $36,000,000 over 5y, 84% of budgetWINDWARD FUND: $32,250,000 over 4y, 8.6% of budgetROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $27,500,000 over 4y, 1.9% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $23,000,000 over 3y, 3.1% of budgetGLOBAL GREENGRANTS FUND: $22,500,000 over 4y, 57% of budgetAmalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc: $18,000,000 over 3y, 5.9% of budgetEarth Island Institute Inc: $12,750,000 over 3y, 19% of budgetROOT CAPITAL INC: $11,000,000 over 2y, 29% of budgetTHE MALALA FUND: $11,000,000 over 2y, 61% of budgetFUSE Corps: $10,500,000 over 3y, 59% of budgetCALIFORNIA VOLUNTEERS FUND: $10,000,000 over 2y, 80% of budgetCLIMATE JOBS NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER INC: $9,500,000 over 2y, 41% of budgetBUILDING DECARBONIZATION COALITION: $9,000,000 over 2y, 30% of budgetCLIMATE AND CLEAN ENERGY EQUITY FUND: $8,500,000 over 2y, 14% of budgetThe New School: $8,400,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetTaproot Earth: $8,000,000 over 2y, 42% of budgetDEEP SOUTH CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL: $7,300,000 over 3y, 33% of budgetPotential Energy Coalition Inc: $7,000,000 over 1y, 25% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $7,000,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetELEMENTAL EXCELERATOR INC: $7,000,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetNATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES INSTITUTE INC: $6,800,000 over 3y, 10% of budgetSUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION: $6,716,666 over 3y, 8.4% of budgetFIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE: $6,500,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetCULTURAL SURVIVAL INC: $6,500,000 over 2y, 64% of budgetGLOBAL RESILIENT CITIES NETWORK: $6,000,000 over 1y, 68% of budgetINTERTRIBAL AGRICULTURE COUNCIL: $5,400,000 over 4y, 33% of budgetTEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIO: $5,000,000 over 2y, 21% of budgetSilicon Valley Community Foundation: $5,000,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER: $5,000,000 over 1y, 5.7% of budgetAfrican American Alliance of CDFI CEOs: $5,000,000 over 1y, 55% of budgetREGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE FOUNDATION: $4,500,000 over 3y, 36% of budgetPARTNERSHIP FOR SOUTHERN EQUITY: $4,000,000 over 2y, 20% of budgetCOMITE CIVICO DEL VALLE INC: $4,000,000 over 2y, 51% of budgetLA COSECHA COMMUNITY SUPPORTED AGRICULTURE: $3,750,000 over 3y, 25% of budgetNeighborhood Funders Group: $3,500,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: $3,500,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetINITIATIVE FOR RESPONSIBLE MINING ASSURANCE: $3,333,332 over 2y, 61% of budgetAMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION: $3,200,000 over 3y, 5.5% of budgetOUTDOOR AFRO: $3,000,000 over 3y, 66% of budgetRESULTS FOR AMERICA: $3,000,000 over 2y, 8.2% of budgetTHE YEARS PROJECT INC: $3,000,000 over 1y, 40% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $3,000,000 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetTHE EARTH SPECIES PROJECT: $3,000,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetTHE CHISHOLM LEGACY PROJECT INC: $3,000,000 over 2y, 31% 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.

The Schmidt Family Fo…The William & Flora H…Windward FundUnited States Energy …Amalgamated Charitabl…The Kresge FoundationSilicon Valley Commun…Climateworks Foundati…Rockefeller Philanthr…Tides FoundationJohn D and Catherine …Natural Resources Def…
The Schmidt Family FoundationCA56.1× affinity28 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Schmidt Family Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Windward Fund · United States Energy Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Kresge Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Climateworks Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Tides Foundation · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc

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 Waverley Street Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Waverley Street Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 90%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 14%
  • Ironbound Community Corporation: 100% of income from government
  • New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance: 39% of income from government
  • Foodcorps Inc: 21% of income from government
  • Ecotrust: 14% of income from government
  • Root Capital Inc: 9% of income from government
  • African American Alliance of Cdfi CEOs: 3% of income from government
  • Resist Inc: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
9get no government money at all
23report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Waverley Street Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Waverley Street 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.

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 189 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Waverley Street’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