· Public charity
WRLD Foundation
WRLD Foundation's mission is to support scientific projects, awareness-raising efforts, educational programs, and other charitable undertakings.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2022–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 27 grants below total $4,654,273 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $9,618,603 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $4,964,330 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 · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $7k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $51k
- $50k–250k20 grants · $2.6M
- $250k+3 grants · $2.0M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Global Forest Generation | $834,678 |
| ReWild | $675,921 |
| CALCEF Innovations | $441,712 |
| Plant with Purpose | $240,000 |
| International Cryosphere Climate | $223,333 |
| Clean Air Task Force INC | $215,000 |
| One Tree planted | $190,579 |
| Conservation Strategy Fund | $174,729 |
| Amazon Frontlines | $160,000 |
| Vycarb | $150,000 |
| Precision Development Inc | $122,866 |
| Clinton Health Access Initiative | $120,000 |
| Jocotoco Conservation Foundation | $102,027 |
| Rights and Resources Institute | $100,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $100,000 |
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 (FY22–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 68% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
Grants abroad, by region — $5.0M on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 7 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: Project support for the Climate Transformation Fund and carbon dioxide removal · Project support for the Nature Transformation Fund · Project support for the Ocean Fund
Stated purpose: Project support for the Forest & Landscapes Fund · Project support for the Nature Transformation Fund · Project support for the Ocean Fund
Stated purpose: Project support for the Climate Transformation Fund and carbon dioxide removal · Project support for the Nature Transformation Fund · Project support for the Ocean Fund
Stated purpose: Project support for the Climate Transformation Fund and carbon dioxide removal
Stated purpose: Project support for the Climate Transformation Fund and carbon dioxide removal · Project support for the Forest & Landscapes Fund · Project support for the Ocean Fund
Stated purpose: Project support for the Climate Transformation Fund and carbon dioxide removal
Stated purpose: Project support for the Forest & Landscapes Fund
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. 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 7% of WRLD Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
8 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 17 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 51% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.2M 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
- CICalCef Innovations2× · 2022–2024 · $454k · revenue +76%
- ICINTERNATIONAL CRYOSPHERE CLIMATE INITIATIVE2× · 2023–2024 · $293k · revenue +198% · 48% of their budget
- FUFLORESTA USA INCORPORATED2× · 2022–2024 · $252k · revenue +43%
Funded once
- RReWildone grant, 2023 · $259k
- RDRURAL DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTEone grant, 2023 · $210k · revenue +23%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $200k
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 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.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
The coalition for rainforest nations seeks to underpin lasting environmental sustainability and economic advancement with strengthened technical capacity and international market reform designed to enhance forest stewardship, biodiversity,…
Development of programs to offset personal and corporate carbon emissions through reforestation in the tropics.
To empower frontline communities to lead nature-based solutions that advance climate justice, ecosystem restoration, and resilient livelihoods through connecting locally-led initiatives to funding, markets, and technical support.
Natura International conserves rainforests and other key natural ecosystems and the endangered species they contain through creation of protected areas in collaboration with local governments and communities in Latin America. In this way…
To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with Indigenous communities in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability, and the preservation of the Amazon Basin's…
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.
Our mission is to protect vital areas of our natural world for the benefit of wildlife, habitats, and people by inspiring collaborative action. Our vision is a world where wildlife and people flourish in healthy ecosystems that sustain us…
Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.
To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rewild and the most unlike its peers is International Cryosphere Climate Initiative. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
21 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. 21 of the 32 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 Global Forest Generation ↗
- Who funds REWILD ↗
- Who funds CalCef Innovations ↗
- Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL CRYOSPHERE CLIMATE INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds FLORESTA USA INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds AMAZON FRONTLINES ↗
- Who funds RURAL DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds ONE TREE PLANTED INC ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION STRATEGY FUND ↗
- Who funds PRECISION DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds Jocotoco Conservation Foundation ↗
- Who funds RARE ↗
- Who funds RIGHTS AND RESOURCES INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds WRLD Foundation ↗
- Who funds MARINE MEGAFAUNA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WILDLIFEDIRECT INC ↗
- Who funds MANGROVE ACTION PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Amigos De Iracambi (US) Inc ↗
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: Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 WRLD Foundation 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.
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 WRLD Foundation?
Find your warmest path to WRLD Foundation 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.