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

· Public charity

Wildlife Conservation Society

The Wildlife Conservation Society (wcs) saves wildlife and wild places worldwide through science, conservation action, education, and inspiring people to value nature.

$24M
Granted FY2025still arriving
39
Grants FY2025still arriving
18
States reached
$1.3M
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 2025.

Environment$52MAnimals$9.0MInternational$2.6MCrime & Legal$577kRecreation & Sports$249kScience & Tech$37k
02FY2025 · 39 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 39 grants below total $6,949,680, the rows itemized in this filing. The $24,128,708 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $17,179,028 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 $10k2 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k12 grants · $380k
  • $50k–250k19 grants · $1.8M
  • $250k+6 grants · $4.8M
$52,514
Median grant
18
States reached
$1.2B
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Partners for Development (PfD)$1,266,855
Environmental Defense Fund Inc$973,690
Internews Network$928,428
Catholic Relief Services USCCB$803,979
Woods Hole Oceanographic$528,210
University of Alaska$268,888
Rare Inc$219,565
ADM Capital Foundation Inc$206,000
Nature Conservancy$147,189
EpiEcos$120,240
North Slope Borough$104,158
Tucson Audubon Society Inc$100,000
Natural Resources Foundation of Wisconsin Inc$100,000
Methow Salmon Recovery Foundation$99,576
STONE BARNS RESTORATION Corp$90,199
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 12%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 69% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%ADM Capital Foundation Inc: $253k → 7%International Fund For Animal Welfare: $311k → 8%NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $496k → 17%World Wildlife Fund: $4.2M → 14%Mote Marine Laboratory: $271k → 9%Huron River Watershed Council: $227k → 14%University of Alaska: $269k → 8%AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION FUND: $312k → 14%Jane Goodall Institute: $602k → 6%World Wildlife Fund: $3.0M → 14%AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION FUND: $218k → 14%Jane Goodall Institute: $428k → 6%Woods Hole Oceanographic: $528k → 8%World Wildlife Fund: $3.0M → 14%Jane Goodall Institute: $355k → 6%Rare Inc: $220k → 7%Woods Hole Oceanographic: $505k → 8%World Wildlife Fund: $2.4M → 14%Woods Hole Research Center: $714k → 8%Woods Hole Oceanographic: $426k → 8%World Wildlife Fund: $909k → 14%Woods Hole Research Center: $426k → 8%World Wildlife Fund: $469k → 14%Partners for Development (PfD): $1.3M → 8%Woods Hole Research Center: $346k → 8%World Wildlife Fund: $435k → 14%NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $298k → 6%Partners for Development (PfD): $800k → 8%HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL: $235k → 14%Nature Conservancy: $1.1M → 7%Nature Conservancy: $1.1M → 7%Nature Conservancy: $809k → 7%African Wildlife Foundation: $526k → 14%Nature Conservancy: $765k → 7%American Rivers: $275k → 14%Nature Conservancy: $549k → 7%African Wildlife Foundation: $263k → 14%Nature Conservancy: $480k → 7%African Wildlife Foundation: $234k → 14%CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL: $319k → 7%African Wildlife Foundation: $210k → 14%CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL: $286k → 7%CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL: $252k → 7%Environmental Defense Fund Inc: $974k → 17%Environmental DEfense Fund Inc: $387k → 17%African Wildlife Foundation: $416k → 14%World Resource Institute: $225k → 14%National Wildlife Federation Action Fund: $350k → 14%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.

Which US states its grants reach

AK
VT
WA
ID
MT
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
WY
SD
IA
OH
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
VA
MD
DE
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
DC
HI
LA
GA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $17M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 8 regions, $16M to organizations and $941k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$4.4M · 26% · 16 grants · 2 people

Stated purpose: Conservation · Conservation-EU

East Asia and the Pacific$4.2M · 25% · 54 grants · 17 people

Stated purpose: Conservation · Scholarship-EA · Conservation-EA

Central America and the Caribbean$2.8M · 17% · 23 grants · 1 person

Stated purpose: Conservation · Conservation-CA

Sub-Saharan Africa$2.5M · 15% · 33 grants · 40 people

Stated purpose: Conservation · Conservation-Sub · Scholarship-Sub

South America$2.4M · 14% · 48 grants · 12 people

Stated purpose: Conservation · Conservation-So Am · Scholarship-So Am

South Asia$549k · 3% · 6 grants · 18 people

Stated purpose: CONSERVATION · Conservation-So As · Scholarship-So As

North America (Canada and Mexico)$49k · 0% · 1 grant · 3 people

Stated purpose: Conservation · Conservation-NA

Russia and Neighboring States$39k · 0% · 1 grant · 3 people

Stated purpose: Conservation · CONSERVATION-RU

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$56M · 103 repeat orgs$2.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +52% since the first grant, against +21% for those funded once.

103 repeat relationships: 31 still active in FY2025, 72 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

103
30

Total granted

$56M
$1.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+52%
+21%

Still filing today

88%
90%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $603k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentAnimalsEducationInternationalScience & TechArts & CultureOther
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

  • WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $15M · revenue +62%
  • AW
    AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.0M · revenue +54%
  • JG
    JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION
    6× · 2017–2022 · $1.7M · revenue +50%

Funded once

  • AW
    Alaska Wildlife Alliance
    one grant, 2024 · $155k · revenue 0% · 30% of their budget
  • TW
    TREES WATER AND PEOPLE
    one grant, 2024 · $150k · revenue +21%
  • BAT CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL
    one grant, 2024 · $149k · revenue -5%
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
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
2
Cascadia Wildlands

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…

Environment
3
Amazon Conservation Team

The amazon conservation team (act) partners with indigenous and other local communities to protect tropical forests and strengthen traditional culture.

Science & Tech
4
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
5
Rainforest Foundation Inc

The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.

Environment
6
Western Rivers Conservancy

Western rivers conservancy's mission is to protect outstanding river ecosystems in the western united states. continued on schedule o.we acquire land to conserve critical habitat, provide public access for compatible use and enjoyment, and…

Environment
7
Nature and Culture International

Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.

Environment
8
Center for Natural Lands Management

The mission of the center for natural lands management is (a) to conserve native species, their habitat and functioning ecosystems in perpetuity, (b) to own and/or manage lands in an ecologically beneficial manner consistent with local,…

Environment
9
Sustainable Conservation

Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…

Environment
10
Akashinga Inc

Deliver ecological stability and long-term protection of large-scale wilderness by supporting and empowering local communities.

Animals
11
Washington Forest Law Center

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.

—
12
Natura Bolivia Foundation

The Natura Bolivia Foundation is dedicated to implementing, and evaluating the impact of conservation and development programs, with a focus on watershed conservation, protected areas, and incentive based conservation in Bolivia. We work…

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Wilderness Society; the most unlike its peers is Segal Family Foundation 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

127 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 127 of the 145 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.

12
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
32
Early backer (in before they grew)
126/127
Grantees still filing
97/127
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $14,519,392 · EnvironmentWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INCCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $1,438,550 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,361,123 · EnvironmentNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $1,022,651 · Environment+50 more: $10,092,143 · Environment+50 moreTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $5,064,478 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYCATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES: $1,852,490 · OtherCATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICE…MOTE MARINE LABORATORY INC: $475,000 · OtherAmerican Bar Association Fund for Justice and Education: $577,382 · Other+34 more: $5,075,989 · Other+34 moreAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $2,005,857 · AnimalsAFRICAN WILDLIFE…JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION: $1,697,587 · AnimalsJANE GOODALL INS…REWILD: $1,055,058 · AnimalsREWILDTHE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $600,000 · AnimalsTHE TURTLE SURVI…INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC: $501,621 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL FU…NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $480,597 · AnimalsTROUT UNLIMITED INC: $359,093 · Animals+17 more: $2,555,740 · Animals+17 moreWOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION: $1,551,355 · Science & TechWoodwell Climate Research Center Inc: $1,486,537 · Science & TechOIKONOS - ECOSYSTEM KNOWLEDGE: $200,000 · Science & TechCalifornia Ocean Alliance: $150,391 · Science & TechConservation Science Partners Inc: $124,206 · Science & Tech+1 more: $36,740 · Science & TechPARTNERS FOR DEVELOPMENT: $2,066,484 · InternationalWORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $710,659 · InternationalADM CAPITAL FOUNDATION INC: $459,192 · InternationalTHE CENTER FOR ADVANCED DEFENSE STUDIES: $137,117 · International+3 more: $133,534 · InternationalINTERNEWS NETWORK: $2,618,633 · Arts & CulturePiikani Lodge Health Institute: $362,999 · Arts & CultureStone Barns Restoration Corp DBA Stone Barns Center for Food & Agri: $290,199 · Arts & Culture+1 more: $55,000 · Arts & CultureFLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $824,381 · EducationTEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC: $699,755 · EducationMontana State University Foundation Inc: $470,234 · EducationLAKESHORE NATURAL RESOURCE PARTNERSHIP INC: $250,000 · EducationCornell University: $221,545 · EducationPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $200,000 · EducationCOLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $100,874 · EducationPAUL SMITHS COLLEGE: $100,087 · Education+4 more: $121,347 · Education
Environment$28,433,859Other$13,045,339Animals$9,255,553Science & Tech$3,549,229International$3,506,986Arts & Culture$3,326,831Education$2,988,223

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $14,519,392 over 9y, 1.8% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $5,064,478 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetINTERNEWS NETWORK: $2,618,633 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetPARTNERS FOR DEVELOPMENT: $2,066,484 over 2y, 38% of budgetAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $2,005,857 over 9y, 1.6% of budgetJANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION: $1,697,587 over 6y, 3.8% of budgetWOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION: $1,551,355 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetWoodwell Climate Research Center Inc: $1,486,537 over 3y, 3.1% of budgetCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $1,438,550 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,361,123 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetREWILD: $1,055,058 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $1,022,651 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetFLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $824,381 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetWORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $710,659 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC: $699,755 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetThe Ocean Foundation: $648,025 over 7y, 2.3% of budgetTHE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $600,000 over 5y, 11% of budgetAMERICAN RIVERS INC: $599,315 over 5y, 1.3% of budgetAmerican Bar Association Fund for Justice and Education: $577,382 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetRARE: $544,170 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC: $501,621 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $480,597 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetMOTE MARINE LABORATORY INC: $475,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetMontana State University Foundation Inc: $470,234 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetADM CAPITAL FOUNDATION INC: $459,192 over 2y, 63% of budgetCLIMATE CONSERVATION DBA CENTER FOR LARGE LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION: $386,918 over 4y, 8.6% of budgetFOREST TRENDS ASSOCIATION: $379,065 over 3y, 2.2% of budgetPiikani Lodge Health Institute: $362,999 over 3y, 18% of budgetTROUT UNLIMITED INC: $359,093 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetMISSISSIPPI PARK CONNECTION: $347,600 over 4y, 18% of budgetMETHOW SALMON RECOVERY FOUNDATION: $346,160 over 4y, 5.0% of budgetPACIFIC RIM CONSERVATION: $343,530 over 4y, 21% of budgetTucson Audubon Society: $300,000 over 3y, 2.9% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES FOUNDATION OF: $300,000 over 3y, 3.5% of budgetAMERICAN FOREST FOUNDATION: $299,576 over 3y, 1.6% of budgetSKY ISLAND ALLIANCE: $297,837 over 2y, 23% of budgetGARDEN ISLAND RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT INC: $297,000 over 2y, 24% of budgetStone Barns Restoration Corp DBA Stone Barns Center for Food & Agri: $290,199 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetHumane World for Animals International: $285,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetPOINT REYES BIRD OBSERVATORY: $284,256 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetMULTIPLIER: $281,858 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetWILDLIFE ALLIANCE INC: $280,294 over 5y, 1.4% of budgetPlaya Lakes Joint Venture: $279,404 over 3y, 5.9% of budgetROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $275,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHURON RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL: $274,468 over 2y, 14% of budgetPRESERVATION FOUNDATION OF THE LAKE COUNTY FOREST PRESERVES: $256,000 over 2y, 4.5% of budgetPRACTICAL FARMERS OF IOWA: $250,000 over 2y, 3.2% of budgetBIG HOLE WATERSHED COMMITTEE INC: $250,000 over 2y, 37% 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.

National Fish and Wil…The Nature ConservancyPatagoniaorgNational Forest Found…Resources Legacy FundWilburforce FoundationWalton Family Foundat…Gordon E and Betty I …The Pew Charitable Tr…Weeden FoundationThe David and Lucile …Weyerhaeuser Family F…
National Fish and Wildlife FoundationDC49.5× affinity32 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Patagoniaorg · National Forest Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · Wilburforce Foundation · Walton Family Foundation Inc · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · The Pew Charitable Trusts · Weeden Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Weyerhaeuser Family Foundationinc

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 60%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
  • Lomakatsi Restoration Project: 100% of income from government
  • New Haven - Urban Resources Initiative Inc: 100% of income from government
  • Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution: 63% of income from government
  • African Aquatic Conservation Fund Inc: 55% of income from government
  • Xerces Society Inc: 22% of income from government
  • Manomet Inc: 12% of income from government
  • Woodwell Climate Research Center Inc: 11% of income from government
  • Oregon Natural Desert Association: 9% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
  • Mote Marine Laboratory Inc: 4% of income from government
  • Clearwater Marine Aquarium Inc: 1% of income from government
  • University of Maryland Alumni Association: 1% of income from government
  • Tualatin Riverkeepers Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
6get no government money at all
27report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
4rely on government for over half their income
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 145 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 Wildlife Conservation Society’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