· Private foundation
Carolyn & George Rowland Char Fdn Tr
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k4 grants · $105k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $524k
- $250k+1 grant · $430k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BENNINGTON COLLEGE | $430,000 |
| ASPETUCK LAND TRUST INC | $150,000 |
| OSTERVILLE HISTORICAL MUSEUM | $150,000 |
| OSTERVILLE VILLAGE LIBRARY | $124,000 |
| THE FREE LIBRARY OF PHILADELPHIA | $50,000 |
| YALE UNIVERSITY | $50,000 |
| DOWNEAST SALMON FEDERATION | $40,000 |
| THE EQUUS EFFECT | $30,000 |
| MASTERY CHARTER SCHOOLS FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
| CENTER FOR WILDLIFE RESCUE RESEARCH | $15,000 |
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 (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 17%. 1% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
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.
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 +16% since the first grant, against -2% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $220k 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
- BCBENNINGTON COLLEGE CORPORATION7× · 2019–2025 · $2.6M · revenue +26%
- OFOSTERVILLE FREE LIBRARY CORPORATION7× · 2019–2025 · $834k · revenue +20%
- BPBRIDGEPORT PUBLIC EDUCATION FUND INC5× · 2020–2024 · $128k · revenue +16%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2021 · $10k
- PWPOOTATUCK WATERSHED ASSOCIATIONone grant, 2021 · $10k
- TBTHREE BAYS PRESERVATION INCone grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue -2%
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 boston public library fund provides financial support to the boston public library (bpl), ensuring that it remains viable, engaging, accessible, and free to all. the library fund fulfills this mission by working in partnership with…
The franklin land trust works to conserve farms, forests, wildlands, and other natural resources significant to the quality of the environment, economy, and rural character of western massachusetts.
To understand key processes driving the world's ocean ecosystems, their evolution, and their fundamental relationship to life on earth through interrelated research, education, and technology transfer programs.
Kennebunk Land Trust's mission is to permanently conserve and steward land to benefit natural and human communities.
The nantucket conservation foundation owns, protects, and stewards over 9,000 acres of land and coastal shoreline, conserves nantucket's rare and significant natural resources, and engages in impactful ecological research to inform…
To preserve the unique character and natural resources of harvard.
To inspire and enable our communities to discover, learn and connect.
Frenchman Bay Conservancy protects and cares for our local lands and waters for the benefit of communities and nature.
The princeton land trust was formed to preserve the natural beauty and rural character of the town of princeton.
To preserve and steward aquidneck island's open spaces for the lasting benefit of the community while connecting people with the land that defines the island's natural character.
To enhance the quality of life of our community by inspiring lifelong learning, providing free and open access to information, and fostering community connections.
The mission of Islesboro Islands Trust is to enhance the quality of residents' lives through the preservation of open space, educate all residents as to the value of the island's natural ecosystems, and act as an environmental advocate on…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bridgeport Public Education Fund Inc and the most unlike its peers is Haitian Educational Initiatives. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
10 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. 10 of the 16 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 BENNINGTON COLLEGE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds OSTERVILLE FREE LIBRARY CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds ASPETUCK LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds DOWNEAST SALMON FEDERATION ↗
- Who funds BRIDGEPORT PUBLIC EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE EQUUS EFFECT INC ↗
- Who funds FREE LIBRARY OF PHILADELPHIA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HAITIAN EDUCATIONAL INITIATIVES ↗
- Who funds MASTERY CHARTER SCHOOLS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THREE BAYS PRESERVATION 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: Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Carolyn & George Rowland Char Fdn Tr 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Aspetuck Land Trust — 28% of income from government
- Three Bays Preservation Inc — 18% of income from government
- The Equus Effect Inc — 16% of income from government
- Bennington College Corporation — 0% of income from government
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 Carolyn & George Rowland Char Fdn Tr?
Find your warmest path to Carolyn & George Rowland Char Fdn Tr 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.