· Public charity
Western Rivers Conservancy
WESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY's mission is to protect outstanding river ecosystems in the western united states.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 3 grants below total $3,413,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $4,045,968 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $632,968 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
- $250k+1 grant · $3.3M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE YORK TRIBE A FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED INDIAN TRIBE | $3,328,000 |
| ESSELEN TRIBE OF MONTEREY COUNTY | $75,000 |
| YES ON PROP 4 CALIFORNIANS FOR SAFE DRINKING WATER AND WILDLIFE PREVENTION | $10,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 88% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +307% since the first grant, against +80% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.4M went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- RGRIO GRANDE HEADWATERS LAND TRUST3× · 2017–2019 · $321k · revenue -7%
- CFCOL FOUNDATION2× · 2018–2019 · $192k · revenue +307% · 42% of their budget
- YTYUROK TRIBE4× · 2018–2022 · $35k
Funded once
- ELER'-NERR' LAND FUNDone grant, 2018 · $742k · revenue -99%
- AOACCION OPPORTUNITY FUND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $300k · revenue +198%
- COCOLORADO OPEN LANDSgraduated2× · 2017–2025 · $154k · revenue +215%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
The principal mission of the land trust is to work with landowners to protect agricultural and forest lands, water resources, wildlife habitat and scenic open spaces, and to serve our community by facilitating parks and trail in custer,…
To restore water to colorado's rivers.
The foundation works with diverse groups representing many interests to acquire and restore critical wildlife habitat and protecting species
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.
To ensure coast redwood forests in the santa cruz mountains thrive for generations to come. since 1900, sempervirens has protected more than 36,000 acres. learn more about our mission, vision, and strategic plan through 2030 at:…
Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…
To conserve California's extraordinary land and water resources through a strong network of land trusts with one cohesive voice across urban and rural communities.
To preserve new mexico's land heritage by helping people conserve the places they love. nmlc works with landowners and others to protect wildlife habitat, agricultural lands, scenic open space, cultural and historic resources, and…
To conserve and steward the open lands and natural character of the headwaters of the colorado river in partnership with the local community.
Cuenca los ojos works to preserve and restore the biodiversity of the us/mexican borderlands through land protection, habitat restoration and wildlife reintroduction.
The purpose of the organization is to monitor, manage, and preserve conservation easements it stewards in northern california. the organization acquires conservation easements in land exhibiting important natural features to protect and…
Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The California Desert Land Conservancy and the most unlike its peers is Oregon State University Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
12 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. 12 of the 14 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds ER'-NERR' LAND FUND ↗
- Who funds RIO GRANDE HEADWATERS LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds ACCION OPPORTUNITY FUND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ↗
- Who funds COL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COLORADO OPEN LANDS ↗
- Who funds THE CALIFORNIA DESERT LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Esselen Tribe of Monterey County ↗
- Who funds Oregon State University Foundation ↗
- Who funds NISQUALLY LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIANS FOR SAFE DRINKING WATER AND WILDFIRE PREVENTION ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Resources Legacy Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Rivers Conservancy 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.
- Oregon State University Foundation — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Western Rivers Conservancy?
Find your warmest path to Western Rivers Conservancy 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.