Skip to content
Wild Rivers Conservancy of the St Croix & Namekagon at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Wild Rivers Conservancy of the St Croix & Namekagon

The mission of wild rivers conservancy of the st.

$35k
Granted FY2022
1
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$35k
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 2022.

Environment$604k
02FY2022 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$35,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CARNELIAN MARINE ST CROIX WATERSHED$35,000
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 (FY17–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 5%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 5%CHISAGO SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION: $47k → 5%CITY OF LAKE ST CROIX BEACH: $27k → 6%KANABEC COUNTY SOIL AND WATER CONS: $26k → 10%PINE COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONS DIST: $32k → 12%CHISAGO SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION: $16k → 5%CITY OF LAKELAND: $6k → 6%PINE COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONS DIST: $31k → 12%CHISAGO SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION: $6k → 5%WASHINGTON CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $60k → 6%PINE COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONS DIST: $30k → 12%WASHINGTON CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $55k → 6%MIDDLE ST CROIX WATERSHED MGMT ORG: $49k → 6%MIDDLE ST CROIX WATERSHED MGMT ORG: $48k → 6%WASHINGTON CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $31k → 6%WASHINGTON CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $30k → 6%BROWN'S CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT: $20k → 6%BROWN'S CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT: $10k → 6%WASHINGTON CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $7k → 6%CARNELIAN MARINE ST CROIX WATERSHED: $35k → 6%SOUTH WASHINGTON COUNTY WATERSHED: $26k → 6%SOUTH WASHINGTON COUNTY WATERSHED: $14k → 6%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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$510k · 6 repeat orgs$94k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2022, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
3

Total granted

$510k
$59k

Still filing today

0%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $35k went to new ones.

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

  • WC
    WASHINGTON CONSERVATION DISTRICT
    5× · 2017–2021 · $182k
  • MS
    MIDDLE ST CROIX WATERSHED MGMT ORG
    2× · 2017–2019 · $97k
  • PC
    PINE COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONS DIST
    3× · 2019–2021 · $93k

Funded once

  • CO
    CITY OF LAKE ST CROIX BEACH
    one grant, 2017 · $27k
  • KC
    KANABEC COUNTY SOIL AND WATER CONS
    one grant, 2020 · $26k
  • CO
    CITY OF LAKELAND
    one grant, 2017 · $6k
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
04the grantee network

0 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2022.

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 2022, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 0 of the 10 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
0/0
Grantees still filing
0/0
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WASHINGTON CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $182,352 · OtherWASHINGTON CONSERVATION DISTRICTMIDDLE ST CROIX WATERSHED MGMT ORG: $96,624 · OtherMIDDLE ST CROIX WATERSHED MGMT ORGPINE COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONS DIST: $92,634 · OtherPINE COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONS DISTCHISAGO SOIL & WATER CONSERV DISTRICT: $68,000 · OtherCHISAGO SOIL & WATER CONSERV DISTRICTSOUTH WASHINGTON COUNTY WATERSHED: $40,000 · OtherSOUTH WASHINGTON COUNTY WATERSHEDCARNELIAN MARINE ST CROIX WATERSHED: $35,000 · OtherCARNELIAN MARINE ST CROIX WATERSHEDBROWN'S CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT: $30,000 · OtherCITY OF LAKE ST CROIX BEACH: $26,963 · OtherKANABEC COUNTY SOIL AND WATER CONS: $26,253 · Other+1 more: $5,920 · Other
Other$603,746

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their 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.

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 10 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Wild Rivers Conservancy of the St Croix & Namekagon’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