Skip to content
Weconservepa at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Weconservepa

WECONSERVEPA helps people protect, wisely use, and enjoy what nature offers.

$373k
Granted FY2025still arriving
18
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$31k
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 2024.

Environment$932kArts & Culture$28k
02FY2025 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 18 grants below total $271,081, the rows itemized in this filing. The $373,364 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $102,283 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 $10k4 grants · $25k
  • $10k–50k14 grants · $246k
$14,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$3.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NORTHCENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVAN$30,660
CLEARWATER CONSERVANCY$29,939
BERKS NATURE$26,000
WILDLANDS CONSERVANCY$24,000
LANCASTER CONSERVANCY$18,000
MANADA CONSERVANCY$18,000
FARM & NATURAL LANDS TRUST$16,000
DELAWARE HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY$16,000
HERITAGE CONSERVANCY$14,000
FOUNDATION FOR SUSTAINABLE FORESTS$12,000
WESTMORELAND CONSERVANCY$10,989
WESTMORELAND LAND TRUST$10,898
NORTH AMERICAN LAND TRUST$10,000
ALLEGHENY LAND TRUST$10,000
CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY$7,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 53% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 9%BRANDYWINE CONSERVANCY: $12k → 6%HERITAGE CONSERVANCY: $14k → 6%CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY: $15k → 8%LAND CONSERVANCY OF ADAMS COUNTY: $16k → 9%DELAWARE HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY: $16k → 9%FARM & NATURAL LANDS TRUST: $48k → 9%BERKS NATURE: $26k → 11%ALLEGHENY LAND TRUST: $16k → 11%WILDLANDS CONSERVANCY: $24k → 11%MANADA CONSERVANCY: $34k → 12%FOUNDATION FOR SUSTAINABLE FORESTS: $12k → 14%NORTH BRANCH LAND TRUST: $15k → 15%CLEARWATER CONSERVANCY: $30k → 16%HERITAGE CONSERVANCY: $12k → 6%CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY: $12k → 8%LAND CONSERVANCY OF ADAMS COUNTY: $12k → 9%FARM & NATURAL LANDS TRUST: $32k → 9%WESTMORELAND CONSERVANCY: $11k → 10%BERKS NATURE: $16k → 11%ALLEGHENY LAND TRUST: $15k → 11%WILDLANDS CONSERVANCY: $24k → 11%MANADA CONSERVANCY: $18k → 12%FOUNDATION FOR SUSTAINABLE FORESTS: $12k → 14%CLEARWATER CONSERVANCY: $16k → 16%FARM & NATURAL LANDS TRUST: $31k → 9%BERKS NATURE: $15k → 11%WILDLANDS CONSERVANCY: $15k → 11%MANADA CONSERVANCY: $14k → 12%FOUNDATION FOR SUSTAINABLE FORESTS: $12k → 14%CLEARWATER CONSERVANCY: $16k → 16%FARM & NATURAL LANDS TRUST: $30k → 9%BERKS NATURE: $15k → 11%MANADA CONSERVANCY: $12k → 12%CLEARWATER CONSERVANCY: $15k → 16%FARM & NATURAL LANDS TRUST: $24k → 9%BERKS NATURE: $13k → 11%CLEARWATER CONSERVANCY: $12k → 16%FRENCH AND PICKERING CREEKS CONSERV: $19k → 6%FARM & NATURAL LANDS TRUST: $24k → 9%WESTERN PA CONSERVANCY INC: $12k → 11%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $16k → 12%TINICUM CONSERVANCY: $15k → 6%FARM & NATURAL LANDS TRUST: $24k → 9%BERKS COUNTY CONSERVANCY: $18k → 11%WESTERN PA CONSERVANCY INC: $12k → 11%TINICUM CONSERVANCY: $13k → 6%FARM & NATURAL LANDS TRUST: $16k → 9%BERKS COUNTY CONSERVANCY: $12k → 11%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.
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 19 repeat orgs$75k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +90% since the first grant, against +38% for those funded once.

19 repeat relationships: 14 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
3

Total granted

$1.1M
$29k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+90%
+38%

Still filing today

100%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $46k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentArts & CulturePhilanthropyOther
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

  • FN
    FARM & NATURAL LANDS TRUST OF YORK CO
    8× · 2017–2025 · $229k · revenue +386%
  • BN
    BERKS NATURE
    8× · 2017–2025 · $122k · revenue +113%
  • TC
    THE CLEARWATER CONSERVANCY OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA INC
    6× · 2017–2025 · $95k · revenue +85%

Funded once

  • PE
    PENNSYLVANIA ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue +38%
  • CC
    CAMBRIA COUNTY CONSERVATION & RECRE
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
  • TL
    THE LEBANON VALLEY CONSERVANCY INC
    one grant, 2021 · $9k · revenue +4%
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
Montgomery County Lands Trust Inc

Land Conservation and Preservation.

Environment
2
Weconservepa

Weconservepa helps people protect, wisely use, and enjoy what nature offers. we advocate for pro-conservation, life sustaining government policy. we assist individuals and organizations in conserving natural areas, farms, forests, parks,…

Environment
3
Independence Conservancyinc

Preserving open space by acquisition, easement or deed restriction to protect wildlife habitat, natural and cultural resources, scenic views and quality of life; providing stewardship of watersheds in southwestern pennsylvania through…

Environment
4
Lancaster County Conservancy

The mission of the lancaster county conservancy is "providing wild and forested lands and clean waterways for our community forever". the charitable purposes of the lancaster county conservancy include preservation of natural lands,…

Environment
5
Willistown Conservation Trust Inc

The mission of the Willistown Conservation Trust is to preserve and manage the open land, rural character, scenic, recreational, historic, agricultural and natural resources of the Willistown area and nearby communities, and to share these…

Environment
6
Penns Valley Conservation Association

To serve as a steward for the natural and cultural communities in the upper Penns Creek Watershed. We seek to preserve and Honor the agricultural roots of Penns Valley by protecting and conserving its waters, farmland, forests and rural…

Environment
7
Natural Lands Trust Inc

Saves open space, cares for nature, and connects people to the outdoors. (See schedule O)

Environment
8
Livingston Land Conservancy Inc

To protect the natural heritage and rural character of the greater Livingston County area by preserving quality natural areas and productive farmland. To promote an appreciation and understanding of the environment for the long term…

Environment
9
New River Land Trust

To conserve the rural, natural, and cultural heritage of the new river region, protecting farms, forests, open spaces, and historic places.

Environment
10
Land Conservancy Inc
Environment
11
West Creek Conservancy

Our mission is to enrich the lives of all people in northeast ohio by conserving natural habitats, restoring the ecological value of our region's lands and waters, and expanding opportunities to connect people from all cultures to…

Environment
12
Woodstock Land Conservancy Inc

Acquire land and easements to preserve and enhance the open lands, forests, water resources, scenic areas and historical sights of the Woodstock, NY area. Steward protected lands and offer educational programs and events regarding nature…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wildlands Conservancy Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Foundation for Sustainable Forests Inc. 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

25 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. 25 of the 27 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/25
Grantees still filing
17/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FARM & NATURAL LANDS TRUST OF YORK CO: $228,523 · EnvironmentFARM & NATURAL LANDS TRUST OF YORK COBERKS NATURE: $122,471 · EnvironmentBERKS NATURETHE CLEARWATER CONSERVANCY OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA INC: $95,373 · EnvironmentTHE CLEARWATER CONSERVANCY OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA INCMANADA CONSERVANCY: $84,767 · EnvironmentMANADA CONSERVANCYNORTHCENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY: $82,028 · EnvironmentNORTHCENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCYWILDLANDS CONSERVANCY INC: $70,500 · EnvironmentWILDLANDS CONSERVANCY INCALLEGHENY LAND TRUST: $54,411 · EnvironmentLAND CONSERVANCY OF ADAMS COUNTY INC: $52,454 · EnvironmentFRENCH AND PICKERING CREEKS CONSERVATION TRUST INC: $49,863 · EnvironmentCENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY INC: $40,093 · EnvironmentTINICUM CONSERVANCY: $35,862 · Environment+9 more: $139,568 · Environment+9 moreHERITAGE CONSERVANCY INC: $51,750 · Arts & CultureBrandywine Conservancy & Museum of Art: $27,803 · Arts & CultureChestnut Hill Conservancy: $16,954 · Arts & CultureLANCASTER CONSERVANCY: $18,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $15,800 · OtherCAMBRIA COUNTY CONSERVATION & RECRE: $9,634 · OtherThe Foundation for Sustainable Forests Inc: $35,000 · Philanthropy
Environment$1,055,913Arts & Culture$96,507Other$43,434Philanthropy$35,000

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 budgetFARM & NATURAL LANDS TRUST OF YORK CO: $228,523 over 8y, 7.1% of budgetBERKS NATURE: $122,471 over 8y, 0.8% of budgetTHE CLEARWATER CONSERVANCY OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA INC: $95,373 over 6y, 1.1% of budgetMANADA CONSERVANCY: $84,767 over 5y, 7.7% of budgetNORTHCENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY: $82,028 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetWILDLANDS CONSERVANCY INC: $70,500 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetALLEGHENY LAND TRUST: $54,411 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetLAND CONSERVANCY OF ADAMS COUNTY INC: $52,454 over 5y, 3.5% of budgetHERITAGE CONSERVANCY INC: $51,750 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetFRENCH AND PICKERING CREEKS CONSERVATION TRUST INC: $49,863 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetCENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY INC: $40,093 over 4y, 6.8% of budgetTINICUM CONSERVANCY: $35,862 over 3y, 4.2% of budgetThe Foundation for Sustainable Forests Inc: $35,000 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA CONSERVANCY: $30,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBrandywine Conservancy & Museum of Art: $27,803 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetDELAWARE HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY: $23,500 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetNORTH BRANCH LAND TRUST: $19,920 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetNORTH AMERICAN LAND TRUST: $18,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetChestnut Hill Conservancy: $16,954 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $15,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWESTMORELAND CONSERVANCY: $10,989 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetWestmoreland Land Trust: $10,898 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetPENNSYLVANIA ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE LEBANON VALLEY CONSERVANCY INC: $9,334 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetLANCASTER FARMLAND TRUST: $6,427 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Foundation for Pennsy…The William Penn Foun…The Nature ConservancyOpen Space Institute …Pennsylvania Environm…Land Trust Alliance I…Ppl FoundationNational Fish and Wil…Natural Lands Trust I…Pennsylvania Trout IncPa Cleanways IncAppalachian Trail Con…
Foundation for Pennsylvania WatershedsPA24.1× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Foundation for Pennsylvania Watersheds · The William Penn Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Open Space Institute Land Trust Inc · Pennsylvania Environmental Council Inc · Land Trust Alliance Inc · Ppl Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Natural Lands Trust Inc · Pennsylvania Trout Inc · Pa Cleanways Inc · Appalachian Trail Conservancy

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    12report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 27 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 Weconservepa’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