Skip to content
Baldwin Center for Preservation Development at a glance

· Private foundation

Baldwin Center for Preservation Development

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$108k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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$173kFood & Nutrition$107kHealth$3kEducation$3k
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$509k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
IVY CREEK FOUNDATION$20,000
BOTANICAL GARDEN OF THE PIEDMONT$20,000
BLUE RIDGE PRISM INC$17,500
PIEDMONT DISCOVERY CENTER (PREVIOUSLY CENTER FOR URBAN HABITATS)$10,000
LIVING EARTH SCHOOL$10,000
FOODSHED CAPITAL$10,000
JAMES RIVER ASSOCIATION$10,000
CULTIVATE CHARLOTTESVILLE$10,000
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 (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 6% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%BOTANICAL GARDEN OF THE PIEDMONT: $20k → 8%JAMES RIVER ASSOCIATION: $10k → 22%IVY CREEK FOUNDATION: $20k → 8%THE LIVING EARTH SCHOOL: $15k → 8%THE LIVING EARTH SCHOOL: $10k → 8%LIVING EARTH SCHOOL: $10k → 8%LIVING EARTH SCHOOL: $10k → 8%PIEDMONT DISCOVERY CENTER (PREVIOUSLY CENTER FOR URBAN HABITATS): $10k → 8%PIEDMONT DISCOVERY CENTER (PREVIOUSLY CENTER FOR URBAN HABITATS): $5k → 8%LOCAL FOOD HUB: $2k → 8%CULTIVATE CHARLOTTESVILLE: $1k → 8%LOCAL FOOD HUB: $1k → 8%RED HILL ELEMENTARY PTO: $3k → 8%FOODSHED CAPITAL: $10k → 8%FOODSHED CAPITAL: $10k → 8%FOODSHED CAPITAL: $10k → 8%FOODSHED CAPITAL: $8k → 8%FOODSHED CAPITAL: $5k → 8%IVY CREEK FOUNDATION: $5k → 8%BOTANICAL GARDEN OF THE PIEDMONT: $5k → 8%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.
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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$272k · 10 repeat orgs$13k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
1

Total granted

$272k
$3k

Still filing today

90%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
EnvironmentFood & NutritionYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • LE
    LIVING EARTH SCHOOL
    4× · 2022–2025 · $45k · revenue +14%
  • FC
    FOODSHED CAPITAL
    5× · 2021–2025 · $43k · revenue +163%
  • CC
    Cultivate Charlottesville
    6× · 2020–2025 · $41k · revenue +8%

Funded once

  • RH
    RED HILL ELEMENTARY PTO
    one grant, 2023 · $3k
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
Historic Virginia Land Conservancy

Promoting for the benefit of the general public, the preservation, protection and enjoyment of our natural resources, principally in the lower james, york, rappahannock and chowan rivers and surrounding watersheds.

Environment
2
Renew Richmond

Renew Richmond strives to build healthier, more self-empowered communities by involving local youth in agriculture and environmental sustainability. We do this by partnering with local public schools.

Environment
3
Virginias United Land Trusts

Virginias United Land Trusts was founded to promote conservation statewide and to coordinate conservation planning and green infrastructure. The Organization offers training and educational programs, like our annual Virginia Land…

Environment
4
Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden Inc

Mission - we connect people to plants by inspiring communities to explore and conserve nature.our commitments - organizational sustainability, environmental resiliency, collaboration and gathering, social responsibilityour vision - we are…

Environment
5
Northern Virginia Conservation Trust

The Northern Virginia Conservation Trust saves nearby nature by encouraging and assisting governments and private landowners to preserve and care for natural areas, trails, streams, parks, and historic and cultural resources for the…

Environment
6
Virginia Foundation for Agriculture Innovation and Rural Sustainability

To assist rural virginians in developing and advancing their agricultural, economic and social interests to enhance their quality of life.

Environment
7
Virginia Community Food Connections

Our mission is to ensure the availability, access, and affordability of locally produced food by connecting local farmers and all members of the community through programs, awareness, and advocacy.

Food & Nutrition
8
Palouse Land Trust Inc

Our mission is to work with landowners and communities to conserve the lands we love, now and forever, and to enrich connections to the natural world.

Environment
9
Lula Lake Land Trust

Lula Lake Land Trust is dedicated to the preservation of lands located within the Rock Creek watershed on Lookout Mountain. The mission of Lula Lake Land Trust is to preserve the natural and historic landscapes surrounding Rock Creek and…

Philanthropy
10
Valley Conservation Council

To protect the natural and cultural resources of the greater shenandoah valley region through land conservation, education, and experiences to preserve the life-enriching benefits our land and water provide.

Environment
11
Plants People Community

Plants, people, communityis dedicated to fostering holistic environmental and advancing food systems through culturally relevant programming. we empower communities by integrating conservation strategies, emphasizing the intrinsic link…

Environment
12
New River Land Trust

To conserve the rural, natural, and cultural heritage of the new river region, protecting farms, forests, open spaces, and historic places.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ivy Creek Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Open Hands 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

10 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. 10 of the 12 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
7/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LIVING EARTH SCHOOL: $45,000 · EnvironmentLIVING EARTH SCHOOLBLUE RIDGE PRISM INC: $37,500 · EnvironmentBLUE RIDGE PRISM INCIVY CREEK FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 · EnvironmentIVY CREEK FOUNDATION INCBOTANICAL GARDEN OF THE PIEDMONT: $25,000 · EnvironmentBOTANICAL GARDEN OF THE PIEDMONTTHE LAND TRUST OF VIRGINIA INC: $15,000 · EnvironmentTHE LAND TRUST OF VIRGINIA INCJAMES RIVER ASSOCIATION: $10,000 · EnvironmentJAMES RIVER ASSOCIATIONLOCAL FOOD HUB INC: $23,000 · OtherLOCAL FOOD HUB IN…PIEDMONT DISCOVERY CENTER (PREVIOUSLY CENTER FOR URBAN HABITATS): $15,000 · OtherPIEDMONT DISCOVER…OPEN HANDS INC: $3,000 · OtherOPEN HANDS INCRED HILL ELEMENTARY PTO: $3,000 · OtherRED HILL ELEMENTA…FOODSHED CAPITAL: $42,500 · Food & NutritionFOODSHED CAPITALCultivate Charlottesville: $41,000 · Youth DevelopmentCultivate Charlo…
Environment$157,500Other$44,000Food & Nutrition$42,500Youth Development$41,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLIVING EARTH SCHOOL: $45,000 over 4y, 1.8% of budgetFOODSHED CAPITAL: $42,500 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetCultivate Charlottesville: $41,000 over 6y, 1.0% of budgetBLUE RIDGE PRISM INC: $37,500 over 4y, 2.2% of budgetIVY CREEK FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 2y, 6.3% of budgetBOTANICAL GARDEN OF THE PIEDMONT: $25,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetLOCAL FOOD HUB INC: $23,000 over 6y, 0.8% of budgetTHE LAND TRUST OF VIRGINIA INC: $15,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetJAMES RIVER ASSOCIATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetOPEN HANDS INC: $3,000 over 2y, 1.7% 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.

Charlottesville Area …The Genan FoundationThe J & E Berkley Fou…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Charlottesville Area Community FoundationVA21.8× affinity8 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Charlottesville Area Community Foundation · The Genan Foundation · The J & E Berkley Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Baldwin Center for Preservation Development funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Baldwin Center for Preservation Development. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Baldwin Center for Preservation Development?

    Find your warmest path to Baldwin Center for Preservation Development 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.

    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 12 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-PF 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 Baldwin Center for Preservation Development’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