· Private foundation
Wyss Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 124 grants below total $140,992,919 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $149,392,735 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $8,399,816 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 · FY2023
- Under $10k4 grants · $9k
- $10k–50k18 grants · $480k
- $50k–250k46 grants · $4.4M
- $250k+56 grants · $136M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Wyss Center for Bio & Neuro Engineering | $24,064,756 |
| African Parks Foundation of America | $18,600,000 |
| New Venture Fund | $12,500,000 |
| Foundation Beyeler | $10,040,161 |
| Fundacion Rewilding Argentina | $7,465,000 |
| The Trust for Public Land | $5,132,350 |
| The Conservation Fund | $5,000,000 |
| ReWild | $3,855,000 |
| New York University | $3,522,181 |
| Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation | $3,500,000 |
| Center on Budget and Policy Priorities | $3,000,000 |
| Frankfurt Zoological Society - U.S., Inc. | $2,900,000 |
| Aves Argentinas Asociacion Ornitologica Del Plata | $2,211,600 |
| The Wilderness Society | $2,124,700 |
| Resources Legacy Fund | $1,670,000 |
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 +35% since the first grant, against +9% for the ones you funded once.
120 repeat relationships — 99 still active in FY2023, 21 since wound down; 21 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (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 FY2023, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6.5M 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
THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION3× · 2020–2023 · $26M · revenue +42%
THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND4× · 2020–2023 · $19M · revenue +113%- FZFRANKFURT ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY - US INC4× · 2020–2023 · $12M · revenue +53% · 31% of their budget
Funded once
- WZWyss Zurich Foundationone grant, 2022 · $34M
- EPEcole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanneone grant, 2020 · $20M
- FMFondo Mexicano para la Conservación de la Naturaleza A.C.one grant, 2021 · $9.3M
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 organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.
Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Wildearth guardians works to protect and restore the wildlife, wild places, wild rivers, and health of the american west.
The mission of the montana land reliance (mlr) is to partner with landowners to provide permanent protection for private lands that are significant for agricultural production, fish and wildlife habitat, and open space.
To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
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 water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
Conservation legacy engages future leaders who protect, restore, and enhance our nation's lands through community-based service.in 2024, conservation legacy engaged 2,524 participants who completed over 1.5 million service hours on public…
The wildlands trust works throughout southeastern massachusetts to conserve and permanently protect native habitats, farmland, and lands of high ecologic and scenic value that serve to keep our communities healthy and our residents…
Colorado open lands' mission is to preserve the significant open lands and natural heritage of colorado through private and public partnerships, innovative land conservation, and strategic leadership.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Conservation Colorado Education Fund and the most unlike its peers is The Glacier-Two Medicine Alliance. 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.
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.
Your grantees are a median of 35 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
129 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. 129 of the 184 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 AFRICAN PARKS FOUNDATION OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
- Who funds THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND ↗
- Who funds FRANKFURT ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY - US INC ↗
- Who funds OCEANA INC ↗
- Who funds Center on Budget and Policy Priorities ↗
- Who funds RESOURCES LEGACY FUND ↗
- Who funds New York University ↗
- Who funds REWILD ↗
- Who funds Children's Hospital Los Angeles ↗
- Who funds THE GRAND CANYON TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds Center for Responsible Lending ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF JACKSON HOLE ↗
- Who funds THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Conservation Lands Foundation ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Americans for Financial Reform Education Fund ↗
- Who funds The Pew Charitable Trusts ↗
- Who funds SHERIFF'S MEADOW FOUNDATION ↗
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 · Western Conservation Foundation · Patagoniaorg · The Wilderness Society · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Conservation Lands Foundation · Wilburforce Foundation · The Pew Charitable Trusts · National Forest Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Chester County Community Foundation · New Venture Fund
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Wyss Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Wyss 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.