Skip to content
American Hiking Society at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

American Hiking Society

To empower all to enjoy, share, and preserve the hiking experience.

$160k
Granted FY2017
11
Grants FY2017
9
States reached
$21k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2017 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 11 grants below total $140,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $159,540 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $19,540 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 · FY2017

  • Under $10k5 grants · $38k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $102k
$12,600
Median grant
9
States reached
$884k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
OZARK TRAIL ASSOCIATION$21,000
TRAILS FOR ILLINOIS$19,600
THE SAN DIEGO RIVER PARK FOUNDATION$18,200
SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS TRAILS COUNCIL$16,800
VOLUNTEERS FOR OUTDOOR COLORADO$14,000
BAYOU LAND CONSERVANCY$12,600
FRIENDS OF VAN CORTLANDT PARK$9,800
WOODLANDS CONSERVANCY$8,400
THE FLORIDA TRAIL ASSOCIATION$7,000
BUCKEYE TRAIL ASSOCIATION$7,000
FRIENDS OF GOVERNMENT CANYON$5,600
02The need
02

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 (FY17–17) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 87% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%FRIENDS OF VAN CORTLANDT PARK: $10k → 28%FRIENDS OF GOVERNMENT CANYON: $6k → 16%BAYOU LAND CONSERVANCY: $13k → 16%THE FLORIDA TRAIL ASSOCIATION: $7k → 19%OZARK TRAIL ASSOCIATION: $21k → 20%VOLUNTEERS FOR OUTDOOR COLORADO: $14k → 12%BUCKEYE TRAIL ASSOCIATION: $7k → 16%TRAILS FOR ILLINOIS: $20k → 14%WOODLANDS CONSERVANCY: $8k → 16%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

IL
NY
OH
CA
CO
MO
LA
TX
FL
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 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
Conserving Carolina

To protect, restore, and inspire appreciation of the natural world.

Environment
2
Falls Creek Wildlands and Trails

Falls Creek Wildlands and Trails FCWT promotes conservation stewardship and responsible recreation in the Falls Creek area through trail development and maintenance environmental restoration and preservation projects and educational…

Environment
3
Stewards of the Sequoia

Promoting Responsible Recreation and Environmental Stewardship

Environment
4
Methow Valley Trails Collaborative

Enhancing sustainable trail experiences in the Methow Valley.

Environment
5
Conasauga District Trail Volunteers Inc

Maintain Trails for US Forest Service

Environment
6
Big Thicket Natural Heritage Trust

We acquire properties to be donated to the National Park Service and state entities and advocate for protection of Big Thicket natural resources.

Environment
7
Redwood Coast Land Conservancy

To conserve lands for recreational, educational, ecological, agricultural, scenic & open space opportunities. We develop & maintain public access ways & trails to the ocean, rivers & other natural or scenic features along coastal Mendocino…

Environment
8
Beaver Creek Wetlands Association Inc

The Beaver Creek Wetlands Association preserves and restores our endangered wetland habitat through conservation, stewardship, education and providing public access.

Environment
9
Santa Barbara County Trails Council

Our mission is to protect public trail access build and maintain safe and sustainable trails and promote public engagement in land stewardship and trail use for all types of outdoor recreation.

Recreation & Sports
10
The Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust

The Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust leads and inspires action to conserve and enhance the landscape of the Mountains to Sound Greenway, ensuring a long-term balance between people and nature.

Environment
11
Friends of Edgewood Natural Preserve

Friends of Edgewood Natural Preserve engages in land and wildlife stewardship nature education and interpretive programs that support Edgewood Park and Natural Preserve. Our mission is to protect Edgewoods extraordinary biodiversity and…

Environment
12
The Vermont River Conservancy Inc

Protect land along rivers, lakes and wetlands of vt; protect public access, wildlife habitat, scenic natural beauty, and ecological integrity.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Florida Trail Association Inc; the most unlike its peers is Buckeye Environmental Network. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

9 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 11 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
9/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

The San Diego River Park Foundation: $18,200 · Recreation & SportsThe San Diego River Park FoundationSANTA MONICA MOUNTAIN TRAILS COUNCIL INC: $16,800 · Recreation & SportsSANTA MONICA MOUNTAIN TRAILS COUNCIL INCVOLUNTEERS FOR OUTDOOR COLORADO: $14,000 · Recreation & SportsVOLUNTEERS FOR OUTDOOR COLORADOVAN CORTLANDT PARK ALLIANCE: $9,800 · Recreation & SportsVAN CORTLANDT PARK ALLIANCEWOODLANDS CONSERVANCY: $8,400 · Recreation & SportsWOODLANDS CONSERVANCYTHE FLORIDA TRAIL ASSOCIATION INC: $7,000 · Recreation & SportsTHE FLORIDA TRAIL ASSOCIATION INCOZARK TRAIL ASSOCIATION: $21,000 · EnvironmentOZARK TRAIL ASSOCIATIONBAYOU LAND CONSERVANCY: $12,600 · EnvironmentBAYOU LAND CONSERVANCYBUCKEYE ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK: $7,000 · EnvironmentBUCKEYE ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORKTRAILS FOR ILLINOIS: $19,600 · OtherTRAILS FOR ILLINOISGOVERNMENT CANYON NATURAL HISTORY ASSOCIATION: $5,600 · OtherGOVERNMENT CANYON NA…
Recreation & Sports$74,200Environment$40,600Other$25,200

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetOZARK TRAIL ASSOCIATION: $21,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetVOLUNTEERS FOR OUTDOOR COLORADO: $14,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetBAYOU LAND CONSERVANCY: $12,600 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetVAN CORTLANDT PARK ALLIANCE: $9,800 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetWOODLANDS CONSERVANCY: $8,400 over 1y, 5.7% of budgetBUCKEYE ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK: $7,000 over 1y, 8.4% of budgetTHE FLORIDA TRAIL ASSOCIATION INC: $7,000 over 1y, 0.9% 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.

PatagoniaorgNetwork for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
PatagoniaorgCA13.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Patagoniaorg · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 100%
  • The Florida Trail Association Inc: 100% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely 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 11 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 2017, released 2017. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $5k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2017, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on American Hiking 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