National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

Quick Stats

Annual Giving: $1.3 billion (FY 2023)
Success Rate: ~18% (varies by program; America the Beautiful Challenge 2024)
Decision Time: 4-6 months (typically)
Grant Range: $200,000 - $1,000,000
Geographic Focus: National (all 50 states, U.S. territories, select international)

Contact Details

Headquarters: 1625 Eye Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006

Phone: 202-857-0166 Fax: 202-857-0162 General Inquiries: info@nfwf.org Website: www.nfwf.org Application Portal: easygrants.nfwf.org

Program-Specific Support: Contact staff member listed in specific Request for Proposals (RFP)

Overview

The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) is America's largest private conservation grant-maker, chartered by Congress in 1984 to protect and restore the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats. Over 41 years, NFWF has funded more than 19,700 projects, generating a cumulative conservation impact exceeding $10 billion. In fiscal year 2023 alone, NFWF awarded an unprecedented $1.3 billion in conservation grants through more than 70 competitive grant programs. Operating through public-private partnerships across all 50 states and U.S. territories, NFWF directs public conservation dollars to pressing environmental needs while matching those investments with private contributions. Congress mandates that NFWF leverage federal funding with non-federal contributions, and the Foundation targets a 2:1 portfolio return ratio, ensuring every dollar generates significant additional conservation investment.

Funding Priorities

Grant Programs

NFWF operates through a diverse portfolio of competitive grant programs, each with specific conservation objectives. Notable programs include:

Conservation Partners Program: $200,000 - $1,000,000 (average ~$500,000); focuses on working lands conservation and regenerative agriculture
America the Beautiful Challenge: $122-140 million distributed annually; supports large-scale land and water restoration projects across states, territories, and Tribal nations
National Coastal Resilience Fund: $139 million (2024); awards 94 grants for coastal resilience projects, supporting capacity development through implementation
Acres for America Program: Partners with Walmart to conserve critical habitats
Alaska Fish and Wildlife Fund: State-specific conservation initiatives
Atlantic Flyway Shorebird Initiative: Species-focused conservation
Chesapeake Bay Stewardship Fund: Regional watershed restoration
Gulf Environmental Benefit Fund: Gulf restoration projects ($57+ million in recent announcements)
Southeast Michigan Resilience Fund: Regional climate resilience
Northeast Forests and Rivers Fund: Regional ecosystem protection

Application Methods: Vary by program; most use two-stage process (pre-proposal, then full proposal by invitation) with fixed deadlines. Some programs operate on rolling basis. Apply through Easygrants online portal at easygrants.nfwf.org.

Priority Areas

NFWF's conservation focus spans:

Wildlife and habitat conservation across landscapes
Species recovery and protection (bats, shorebirds, marine mammals, endangered species)
Water quality and watershed restoration
Climate resilience and coastal restoration
Working lands conservation aligned with regenerative agriculture
Community stewardship and environmental justice
Sustainable fisheries and bycatch reduction
Grassland resilience
Forest and watershed protection
Science-based conservation with measurable outcomes

Projects must demonstrate quantifiable conservation metrics, strong partnerships, and long-term sustainability.

What They Don't Fund

NFWF explicitly does not fund:

Political advocacy or litigation of any kind
Lobbying activities
Shortfalls in government agency budgets
General administrative overhead
Fundraising activities
Terrorist activities or activities violating executive orders
Compliance with legal requirements, including permit conditions, compensatory mitigation, or settlement agreements
Court-ordered mitigation projects

Ineligible Applicants: Federal government agencies, unincorporated individuals, foreign organizations (except for projects involving U.S. migratory species or trust resources), for-profit businesses as primary recipients (though eligible as partners or contractors).

Governance and Leadership

Executive Leadership

Jeff Trandahl - Executive Director and CEO (since 2005) Former Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives (1998-2005) with 23 years on Capitol Hill. B.A. in Government/Politics from University of Maryland; Management Certificate from Harvard's Kennedy School. Brings deep understanding of federal partnerships and conservation policy to NFWF's leadership.

Holly Bamford, Ph.D. - Chief Conservation Officer Leads conservation strategy, vision creation, and metrics-based evaluation. Former acting assistant secretary for conservation and management at NOAA. Doctorate in Organic Environmental Chemistry from University of Maryland. Expertise spans coastal resilience, marine protected areas, and sustainable fisheries.

Tokunbo Falayi - Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer With NFWF since 2003. CPA and Chartered Accountant with M.B.A. from University of Maryland's Robert H. Smith School of Business. Previous senior roles at Special Olympics and Arthur Andersen.

Gloria Lett - Vice President/General Counsel Extensive background in legislative and corporate law with previous roles at U.S. House of Representatives and District of Columbia. J.D. from George Washington University Law School.

Board of Directors

NFWF is governed by a 30-member Board of Directors approved by the Secretary of the Interior, including heads of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA.

Board Leadership:

Vice Chair: Patsy Ishiyama (California)
Vice Chair: John A. Tomke (Indiana)

Board Members represent diverse geographic regions with substantial representation from conservation leaders, corporate executives, and Tribal representatives across Florida (4 members), Texas (3), Montana (3), Virginia (3), New York (2), and single representatives from Alabama, Puerto Rico, Tennessee, Washington D.C., Connecticut, Georgia, Alaska, Wyoming, and Rhode Island.

Application Process & Timeline

How to Apply

NFWF uses a competitive grant application process through Easygrants, their online application and management system.

Application System Features:

Access pre-proposals and full proposals unlimited times before submission
Save progress multiple times before final submission
Update and reuse prior proposals and contact profile information
Download proposals as PDFs for applicant records

Two-Stage Process (most programs):

Pre-Proposal Stage: Summary submission outlined in program guidance (requirements vary by program)
Full Proposal Stage: Comprehensive application by invitation for those selected from pre-proposal stage

Important Notes:

Submit only one application per project to the best-fitting program
NFWF staff may relocate applications to more appropriate programs
Before applying, contact NFWF staff to determine if grant request is appropriate and of interest
Applications submitted through live Easygrants system only—summaries are not templates for direct submission

Resources Available:

Program-specific RFPs (Requests for Proposals)
FAQs addressing common questions
Required financial documents guidance
Budget instructions and indirect cost calculator
Interactive mapping tool with instructional webinar
Applicant webinars for major programs

Decision Timeline

Timelines vary by program. Typical process:

Standard Timeline (Example: Conservation Partners Program 2025):

Applicant Webinar: May 2025
Full Proposals Due: July 15, 2025
Review Period: July-November 2025 (4-5 months)
Awards Announced: December 2025
Project Start: October 1, 2025 or within 6 months of award announcement

Other Program Examples:

Northeast Forests and Rivers Fund: Awards announced mid-November
America the Beautiful Challenge: Awards announced November-December
National Coastal Resilience Fund: November announcements

Review Process: Proposals reviewed by public-private committee of partners and technical experts. Funding decisions based on extent applications meet RFP criteria.

Notification: Award announcements made via Easygrants system and press releases.

Success Rates

NFWF grants are highly competitive:

America the Beautiful Challenge (2024):

331 pre-proposals requesting $677 million received
133 applicants invited to submit full proposals
61 grants awarded
~18% overall success rate from pre-proposal to award
Addressed 18% of overall funding demand

National Coastal Resilience Fund (2024):

94 grants awarded from competitive pool
30% of 2024 grants were repeat recipients who moved through capacity development pipeline to implementation

Overall Portfolio:

In FY 2024: 1,183 awards made from significantly larger applicant pool
Success rates vary by program based on available funding and application quality
Highly competitive across all programs

Reapplication Policy

NFWF's specific reapplication policy for unsuccessful applicants is not publicly documented in general terms. Applicants should:

Consult program-specific RFPs for reapplication guidance
Contact program staff listed in RFP for advice on strengthening resubmissions
Review feedback from unsuccessful applications to improve future submissions
Consider applying to different NFWF programs if project scope allows

Application Success Factors

NFWF's Advice to Applicants

From Conservation Partners Program RFP:

"Engage NRCS State Conservationist staff early for coordination" - Partnership with USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service is critical
"Propose larger acreage scales" - "Projects on the larger end of the scale" are preferred
"Target thousands or tens of thousands of acres for landscape-level impact" - Think big for maximum conservation outcomes
Include letters of support from community partners demonstrating collaboration
Submit accurate spatial data representing exact conservation activity locations
Develop site-specific conservation plans aligned with regenerative agriculture principles

Key Evaluation Criteria

Applications are assessed across three dimensions:

1. Conservation Outcomes (Primary Weight):

Alignment with program goals and business plan priorities
Quantifiable, measurable conservation metrics
Partnership engagement with multiple stakeholders
Long-term sustainability beyond grant period
Coordination with USDA programs and other federal initiatives

2. Budget:

Cost-effectiveness and allowable costs
Matching fund ratios (higher matches increase competitiveness)
Realistic budget aligned with project scope
Capacity commensurate with scale and budget size requested

3. Technical Feasibility:

Clear, logical work plan with specific milestones
Demonstrated organizational capacity and experience
Expert engagement (biologists, engineers, technical specialists)
Compliance approach for permits and regulations
Transferability to other locations or replicability

What Makes Applications Competitive

Strong Partnerships: NFWF values collaborative projects. Demonstrate partnerships with federal agencies, state/local governments, NGOs, Tribal nations, landowners, and private sector entities.

Measurable Outcomes: Include specific, quantifiable conservation targets (acres restored, species benefited, water quality improvements, carbon sequestration, etc.).

Matching Contributions: While not always mandatory, matching funds significantly increase competitiveness. NFWF targets 2:1 leverage ratio overall. Acceptable matches include cash, in-kind staff/volunteer time, donated materials, and eligible indirect costs. Note: Landowner cost-share required for Farm Bill programs is NOT eligible as match.

Landscape-Scale Impact: Projects addressing larger geographic areas and benefiting multiple conservation objectives are preferred.

Science-Based Approach: Ground projects in sound science with clear methodology and evaluation frameworks.

Sustainability: Demonstrate how conservation outcomes will persist beyond grant funding period.

Recent Funding Examples

2024 Awards Demonstrate NFWF Priorities:

Coastal Resilience: $139 million across 94 grants for nature-based solutions to climate threats
Land and Water Restoration: $122-140 million through America the Beautiful Challenge supporting 61 projects across 42 states, 3 territories, and 19 Tribal/Native Nations
Gulf Restoration: $57+ million for ecosystem recovery projects
Pipeline Approach: 30% of coastal resilience grants were repeat recipients progressing from planning to implementation, showing NFWF supports projects through development stages

Key Takeaways for Grant Writers

Think Partnership: NFWF is built on public-private collaboration. Strong applications demonstrate robust partnerships across sectors (federal, state, Tribal, NGO, private). Early coordination with NRCS and other federal partners is essential.
Scale Matters: NFWF prefers landscape-level projects affecting thousands or tens of thousands of acres. Small-scale projects face steeper competition unless addressing critical conservation gaps.
Match Funds = Competitiveness: While not always required, providing matching contributions significantly strengthens applications. NFWF seeks 2:1 leverage portfolio-wide, so strong matches (1:1 or higher) improve success odds.
Quantify Everything: Include specific, measurable conservation metrics aligned with program business plans. Vague outcomes weaken applications. Use NFWF's mapping tools and provide accurate spatial data.
Program Alignment is Critical: With 70+ grant programs, selecting the right fit is crucial. Contact program staff before applying to confirm alignment. NFWF may move applications between programs, but starting in the right place saves time.
Pipeline Thinking: NFWF supports projects through stages—capacity building, planning, design, permitting, implementation. If your project isn't implementation-ready, consider applying for earlier-stage support with plans to return for implementation funding.
Be Patient with Competition: With success rates around 18% for major programs, expect competition. High-quality applications that don't receive funding on first attempt may benefit from reapplication with refinements based on feedback.

References

Information accessed December 2025