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

· Public charity

Western Resource Advocates

Western Resource Advocates (WRA) is a regional nonprofit advocacy organization fighting climate change and its impacts to sustain the environment, economy, and people of the West.

$295k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$250k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
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$2.0MMembership Benefit$70kCivil Rights$50kCommunity Improvement$40k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $45k
  • $250k+1 grant · $250k
$250,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$18M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WRA Action Fund$250,000
To Nizhoni Ani$45,000
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 (FY21–21, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%FAITH IN ACTION NEVADA: $15k → 10%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

NY
OR
NV
WY
CA
UT
CO
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.

65%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.4M · 9 repeat orgs$766k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
18

Total granted

$1.4M
$721k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+14%
+25%

Still filing today

78%
78%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $45k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentCivil RightsHuman ServicesInternationalCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitOther

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

  • WA
    WRA Action Fund
    3× · 2021–2024 · $550k · revenue +38% · 86% of their budget
  • IE
    Interwest Energy Alliance
    2× · 2017–2019 · $125k · revenue +98%
  • AC
    ARIZONA CENTER FOR LAW IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST
    4× · 2017–2020 · $100k · revenue +1%

Funded once

  • CC
    CONSERVATION COLORADO
    one grant, 2019 · $200k · revenue -38%
  • ST
    SIGNAL TECH COALITION
    one grant, 2020 · $100k
  • The Partnership Project Inc
    one grant, 2018 · $60k · revenue +25%

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
Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah

Heal utah's mission is to protect utah's environment and its people by promoting clean air, clean energy, and comprehensive solutions to radioactive and toxic waste.

Environment
3
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
4
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
5
Northwest Environmental Advocates

Work through advocacy and education to use federal environmental laws such as the Clean Water Act to protect and restore water quality and habit in the Pacific Northwest and nationwide.

Environment
6
Living Rivers

Living rivers promotes river restoration through mobilization by articulating conservation and alternative management strategies to the public. seeking to revive the natural habitat and spirit of rivers by undoing the extensive damage done…

Environment
7
Fresh Energy

Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.

Environment
8
Environmental Defense Action Fund

To advocate for legislation and policies that protect the environment.

Environment
9
Idaho Conservation League Inc

Icl's mission is to create a conservation community and pragmatic, enduring solutions that protect and restore the air you breathe, the water you drink, and the land and wildlife you love.

—
10
Earthworks

The Corporation is organized exclusively for charitable and educational purposes. Earthworks is dedicated to protecting communities and the environment from the impacts of irresponsible mineral and energy development while seeking…

Public Benefit
11
Western Environmental Law Center

Public interest law firm - the western environmental law center uses the power of the law to foster thriving, resilient western u.s. lands, waters, wildlife, and communities in the face of a changing climate. we envision a thriving west,…

—
12
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

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Utah Clean Energy Alliance Inc and the most unlike its peers is Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest. 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 backsteadyNative Hawaiian Community D…Land Conservation Organizat…Asian American Advocacy & H…Government Accountability R…Environmental Advocacy Orga…
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.

04the grantee network

22 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. 22 of the 28 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/22
Grantees still filing
14/22
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

WRA Action Fund — $550,000 · OtherWRA Action FundCOLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY — $227,705 · OtherCOLORADO STATE UNIVERSITYSIGNAL TECH COALITION — $100,000 · OtherSIGNAL TECH COALITIONUNIVERSITY OF UTAH — $50,000 · OtherSOUTHWEST RESEARCH & INFORMATION CENTER — $35,000 · Other+5 more — $75,200 · Other+5 morePOWDER RIVER BASIN RESOURCE COUNCIL — $140,000 · EnvironmentPOWDER RIVER BASIN RESOURC…UTAH CLEAN ENERGY ALLIANCE INC — $75,000 · EnvironmentUTAH CLEAN ENERGY ALLIANCE…The Partnership Project Inc — $59,500 · EnvironmentThe Partnership Project In…ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED — $50,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND…AMERICAN RIVERS INC — $45,800 · EnvironmentAMERICAN RIVERS INCBlack Mesa Trust inc — $40,000 · EnvironmentBlack Mesa Trust incRIVER NETWORK — $32,000 · EnvironmentRIVER NETWORKCenter for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies — $25,000 · EnvironmentRENEWABLE NORTHWEST PROJECT DBA RENEWABLE NORTHWEST — $25,000 · Environment+2 more — $18,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION COLORADO — $200,000 · Civil RightsCONSERVATION COLO…ARIZONA CENTER FOR LAW IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST — $100,000 · Civil RightsARIZONA CENTER FO…CONSERVATION VOTERS NEW MEXICO EDUCATION FUND — $25,000 · Civil RightsCONSERVATION VOTE…Interwest Energy Alliance — $125,000 · Community ImprovementPROSPERITY WORKS — $95,000 · Membership BenefitTO NIZHONI ANI — $45,000 · EducationUTAH FOUNDATION — $25,000 · Public Benefit
Other$1,037,905Environment$510,300Civil Rights$325,000Community Improvement$125,000Membership Benefit$95,000Education$45,000Public Benefit$25,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetWRA Action Fund — $550,000 over 3y, 86% of budgetCONSERVATION COLORADO — $200,000 over 1y, 7.8% of budgetPOWDER RIVER BASIN RESOURCE COUNCIL — $140,000 over 3y, 7.5% of budgetInterwest Energy Alliance — $125,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetARIZONA CENTER FOR LAW IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST — $100,000 over 4y, 3.2% of budgetPROSPERITY WORKS — $95,000 over 3y, 5.3% of budgetUTAH CLEAN ENERGY ALLIANCE INC — $75,000 over 3y, 3.4% of budgetThe Partnership Project Inc — $59,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED — $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN RIVERS INC — $45,800 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTO NIZHONI ANI — $45,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetBlack Mesa Trust inc — $40,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetRIVER NETWORK — $32,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetUTAH FOUNDATION — $25,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetCenter for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies — $25,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetRENEWABLE NORTHWEST PROJECT DBA RENEWABLE NORTHWEST — $25,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetCONSERVATION VOTERS NEW MEXICO EDUCATION FUND — $25,000 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetACTING IN COMMUNITY TOGETHER IN ORGANIZING NORTHERN NEVADA — $15,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetONE APIA NEVADA — $15,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetFRIENDS Of Great Salt Lake — $10,000 over 1y, 5.1% of budgetBONNEVILLE ENVIRONMENTAL FOUNDATION — $8,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

United States Energy …PatagoniaorgTides FoundationWestern Conservation …The Energy FoundationNew Venture FundAmalgamated Charitabl…Environmental Defense…The Nature ConservancyEnergy Action FundNatural Resources Def…The Pew Charitable Tr…
United States Energy FoundationCA23.2× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United States Energy Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Tides Foundation · Western Conservation Foundation · The Energy Foundation · New Venture Fund · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated · The Nature Conservancy · Energy Action Fund · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · The Pew Charitable Trusts

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 Resource Advocates 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 · 10%6%23%51%90%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 100%
  • Bonneville Environmental Foundation — 100% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
4report 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

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.

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 28 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