Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

Western Conservation Action

Increase the strength, effectiveness and political power of the western conservation movement.

$2.7M
Granted FY2024still arriving
36
Grants FY2024still arriving
11
States reached
$250k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.

Environment$11MPublic Benefit$339kCivil Rights$322kAnimals$95kEducation$14k
02FY2024 · 36 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k11 grants · $267k
  • $50k–250k24 grants · $2.2M
  • $250k+1 grant · $250k
$60,000
Median grant
11
States reached
$4.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
STEWARDSHIP UTAH$250,000
WESTERN WAY ACTION$240,000
ARIZONANS FOR A CLEAN ECONOMY$220,000
NEW MEXICO WILD ACTION FUND$201,000
DREAMS IN ACTION NM$132,000
MORMON WOMEN FOR ETHICAL GOVERNMENT$110,000
WILDEARTH GUARDIANS$100,000
CENTER FOR CIVIC ACTION$95,000
ARIZONA TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL$95,000
SOLAR UNITED NEIGHBORS ACTION$90,000
WORC DBA COLORADO RURAL VOTERS$80,000
VETSFORWARD CIVIC ACTION$80,000
CONSERVATION COLORADO$80,000
AMARGOSA CONSERVANCY$75,000
MAKE THE ROAD ACTION$75,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $364k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 31% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%MAKE THE ROAD NV: $100k → 13%Mormon Women for Ethical Government Foundation: $72k → 8%MORMON WOMEN FOR ETHICAL GOVERNMENT: $40k → 8%MORMON WOMEN FOR ETHICAL GOVERNMENT: $30k → 8%MORMON WOMEN FOR ETHICAL GOVERNMENT: $110k → 8%Hispanic Access Foundation: $12k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

NH
ID
MT
MN
WI
NY
OR
NV
CA
UT
CO
VA
AZ
NM
DC

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

70%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$8.4M · 42 repeat orgs$3.5M to everyone else

42 repeat relationships — 25 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

42
54

Total granted

$8.4M
$2.7M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+11%
+22%

Still filing today

93%
91%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 69% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $860k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentCivil RightsCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitAnimalsHuman ServicesOther

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

  • LO
    LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC
    2× · 2020–2022 · $920k · revenue +104%
  • WW
    Western Way Action
    4× · 2021–2024 · $513k · revenue ×22 · 100% of their budget
  • PN
    PROGRESSNOW NEW MEXICO
    5× · 2020–2024 · $467k · revenue +55% · 39% of their budget

Funded once

  • MC
    MONTANA CONSERVATION VOTERS INC
    one grant, 2020 · $335k · revenue +22% · 42% of their budget
  • VA
    VOTEVETS ACTION FUND INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $188k · revenue +129%
  • BH
    BACKCOUNTRY HUNTERS & ANGLERS
    one grant, 2020 · $162k · revenue -12%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Nw Energy Coalition

The NW Energy Coalition is an alliance of over 100 environmental, civic, and human service organizations, utilities, and businesses in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia, plus many individual members. The NW Energy…

—
2
CalWild

The California Wilderness Coalition protects the natural landscapes that make California unique, providing clean air and water, a home to wildlife, and a place for recreation and spiritual renewal.

—
3
California Environmental Justice Alliance

Our mission is to fight against fossil fuel executives and industries that have turned our communities into dumping grounds for toxic waste, poisoning our air, water, lan, and bodies. We organize to oppose giant oil refineries, dirty…

Environment
4
Santa Fe Forest Coalition

Educate the public on forest conservation issues in New Mexico

Environment
5
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators

The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.

Education
6
Boulder Watershed Collective

The Boulder Watershed Collective is a 501c3 non-profit stakeholder-driven organization established to address forested watershed health,resiliency and stewardship. We have three program areas: ClimateAdaptation and Resilience Watershed…

Environment
7
Alaska Wildlife Alliance

Support ecosystem-based wildlife management by increasing public awareness of wildlife issues, responding to information requests, advocating for science-based wildlife habitat management through proposal and comment submissions, and…

Environment
8
Northern Plains Resource Council

Northern Plains believes people working together can make a difference. Our mission is to organize Montanans to protect our water, land, air, and working landscapes; support a healthy, localized, and sustainable economy in farm and ranch…

Community Improvement
9
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
10
Water Protector Legal Collective

The water protector legal collective is an indigenous-led legal nonprofit that provides support and advocacy for indigenous peoples and original nations, the earth, and climate justice movements.

Crime & Legal
11
Great Basin Resource Watch

Natural resource protection: Protected communities and the environment from the negative impacts of mineral development; provided support to communities impacted by mining

Environment
12
American Common Ground Council Inc

ConservAmerica is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to the development and advancement of market based energy, environmental, and conservation policy.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Conservation Colorado and the most unlike its peers is The Glacier-Two Medicine Alliance. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyImmigrant Worker SupportWomen & Girls Leadership De…Health Access Advocacy and …Military Veterans SupportCommunity FoundationsPolicy Research and AdvocacyEnvironmental Conservation …
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 22 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%4%<5yr14%15%5–10yr19%23%10–20yr16%34%20–35yr13%18%35–55yr16%7%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%4%<5yr14%18%5–10yr19%22%10–20yr16%24%20–35yr13%26%35–55yr16%6%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
3%3/106
the rest of the field
13%
240,395/1,819,459

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.

04the grantee network

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

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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 99 of the 106 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.

15
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
30
Early backer (in before they grew)
97/99
Grantees still filing
60/99
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

RUP INC — $1,000,000 · OtherRUP INCWestern Way Action — $513,000 · OtherWestern Way ActionMONTANA CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $335,000 · OtherMONTANA CONSERVATION VOTERS INCARIZONA TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL — $259,500 · OtherSIERRA CLUB — $242,600 · OtherArizonans for a Clean Economy — $220,000 · OtherWESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS — $212,000 · OtherVOTEVETS ACTION FUND INC — $187,725 · OtherLOGIC ACTION — $180,000 · Other+34 more — $2,105,579 · Other+34 moreLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $920,000 · Civil RightsLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION V…PROGRESSNOW NEW MEXICO — $467,000 · Civil RightsPROGRESSNOW NEW MEXICOCENTER FOR CIVIC ACTION — $404,000 · Civil RightsCENTER FOR CIVIC ACTIONCONSERVATION COLORADO — $177,600 · Civil RightsCONSERVATION COLORADOPROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA ACTION — $155,500 · Civil RightsPROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP A…WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC — $142,000 · Civil RightsWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZ…+7 more — $298,000 · Civil Rights+7 more350 Colorado Action — $316,600 · Environment350 Colorado ActionNEW MEXICO WILD ACTION FUND — $293,500 · EnvironmentNEW MEXICO WILD ACTI…GreenLatinos — $175,965 · EnvironmentGreenLatinosBACKCOUNTRY HUNTERS & ANGLERS — $162,000 · EnvironmentBACKCOUNTRY HUNTERS …NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION ACTION FUND — $150,000 · EnvironmentNATIONAL WILDLIFE FE…Solar United Neighbors Action — $135,000 · EnvironmentSolar United Neighbo…REP ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION — $119,000 · EnvironmentREP ENVIRONMENTAL ED…WILD MONTANA ACTION FUND — $113,000 · EnvironmentMT MOUNTAIN MAMAS — $105,000 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE EARTH — $90,000 · EnvironmentNevada Conservation League Ed Fund — $75,000 · Environment+14 more — $424,300 · Environment+14 moreSTEWARDSHIP UTAH — $250,000 · Community ImprovementCULTIVANDO — $76,000 · Community ImprovementGood Business Colorado Association — $75,000 · Community ImprovementAmerica Votes — $70,000 · Community ImprovementGood Business Colorado — $70,000 · Community ImprovementSTRONG TOWNS — $45,000 · Community ImprovementInterwest Energy Alliance — $40,000 · Community ImprovementWESTERN COLORADO ALLIANCE — $30,000 · Community ImprovementPartnership for Responsible Business — $30,000 · Community ImprovementLOCAL FIRST ARIZONA FOUNDATION — $25,000 · Community Improvement+2 more — $17,500 · Community ImprovementPUBLIC CITIZEN INC — $255,000 · Public BenefitEarthworks — $90,000 · Public BenefitNEW MEXICO ETHICS WATCH — $85,000 · Public BenefitCoalition to Protect Americas National — $32,500 · Public BenefitTAXPAYERS FOR COMMON SENSE ACTION — $30,000 · Public BenefitCLEAN ENERGY ECONOMY FOR THE REGION — $30,000 · Public BenefitPUBLIC CITIZEN FOUNDATION INC — $25,000 · Public BenefitMormon Women For Ethical Government — $252,000 · Human ServicesMake The Road States Inc — $100,000 · Human Services+1 more — $11,543 · Human ServicesPROGRESSNOW COLORADO — $187,500 · EducationCOLORADO RISING FOR COMMUNITIES — $93,000 · EducationCOLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES FOUNDATION — $60,000 · Education
Other$5,255,404Civil Rights$2,564,100Environment$2,159,365Community Improvement$728,500Public Benefit$547,500Human Services$363,543Education$340,500

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetRUP INC — $1,000,000 over 4y, 26% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $920,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetWestern Way Action — $513,000 over 4y, 100% of budgetPROGRESSNOW NEW MEXICO — $467,000 over 5y, 39% of budgetCENTER FOR CIVIC ACTION — $404,000 over 4y, 18% of budgetMONTANA CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $335,000 over 1y, 42% of budget350 Colorado Action — $316,600 over 3y, 34% of budgetNEW MEXICO WILD ACTION FUND — $293,500 over 3y, 32% of budgetARIZONA TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL — $259,500 over 4y, 4.8% of budgetPUBLIC CITIZEN INC — $255,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetMormon Women For Ethical Government — $252,000 over 4y, 45% of budgetSTEWARDSHIP UTAH — $250,000 over 1y, 9.6% of budgetSIERRA CLUB — $242,600 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetArizonans for a Clean Economy — $220,000 over 1y, 19% of budgetWESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS — $212,000 over 5y, 2.2% of budgetVOTEVETS ACTION FUND INC — $187,725 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetPROGRESSNOW COLORADO — $187,500 over 5y, 22% of budgetCONSERVATION COLORADO — $177,600 over 4y, 5.0% of budgetGreenLatinos — $175,965 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetWILDEARTH GUARDIANS — $170,000 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetBACKCOUNTRY HUNTERS & ANGLERS — $162,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetPROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA ACTION — $155,500 over 3y, 2.4% of budgetVETSFORWARD CIVIC ACTION — $155,000 over 3y, 43% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION ACTION FUND — $150,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC — $142,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetSolar United Neighbors Action — $135,000 over 3y, 12% of budgetRENO SPARKS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $130,000 over 4y, 4.4% of budgetCOPIRG CITIZEN LOBBY INC — $126,000 over 3y, 14% of budgetREP ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION — $119,000 over 3y, 18% of budgetWILD MONTANA ACTION FUND — $113,000 over 2y, 54% of budgetMT MOUNTAIN MAMAS — $105,000 over 4y, 19% of budgetMake The Road States Inc — $100,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetPROTECT OUR WINTERS ACTION FUND — $98,000 over 3y, 80% of budgetCOLORADO RISING FOR COMMUNITIES — $93,000 over 1y, 27% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE EARTH — $90,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetEarthworks — $90,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetNEW MEXICO ETHICS WATCH — $85,000 over 2y, 26% of budgetCONSERVATION VOTERS NEW MEXICO — $81,000 over 3y, 2.6% of budgetWestern Resource Advocates — $76,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetCULTIVANDO — $76,000 over 3y, 3.9% of budgetGood Business Colorado Association — $75,000 over 1y, 35% of budgetSpirit of the Sun Inc — $75,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetMONTANA WILDLIFE FEDERATION — $75,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetNevada Conservation League Ed Fund — $75,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetSEARCHLIGHT NEW MEXICO NEWS — $75,000 over 2y, 5.0% of budgetMAKE THE ROAD ACTION INC — $75,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetAmargosa Land Trust — $75,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetAmerica Votes — $70,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

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.

Western Conservation …Energy Action FundSixteen Thirty FundResources Legacy FundUnited States Energy …Environmental Defense…The Wilderness SocietyPatagoniaorgNew Venture FundAmerica VotesLeague of Conservatio…The Energy Foundation
Western Conservation FoundationCO86.5× affinity40 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Western Conservation Foundation · Energy Action Fund · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Resources Legacy Fund · United States Energy Foundation · Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated · The Wilderness Society · Patagoniaorg · New Venture Fund · America Votes · League of Conservation Voters Inc · The Energy 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 Western Conservation Action 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    16report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–25

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Western Conservation Action?

    Find your warmest path to Western Conservation Action 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 106 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    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 camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home
    State money flows
    the interactive map of money crossing state lines