Skip to content
Carr Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Carr Family Foundation

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.

$12k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$4k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Environment$26kScience & Tech$11kReligion$1kArts & Culture$360Animals$180Recreation & Sports$180Other$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$360
Median grant
3
States reached
$67k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Union Of Concerned Scientists$3,600
Union Of Concerned Scientists$1,980
Maine Coast Heritage Trust$1,440
Natural Resources Defense Council$1,440
Natural Resources Council Of Maine$1,440
Maine Island Trail Association$360
Friends of the Kotzschmar Organ$360
Appalachian Mountain Club$360
Maine Appalachian Trail Club$180
Individual grant recipient$180
Marine Mammals Of Maine$180
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 61% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Union Of Concerned Scientists: $4k → 8%Appalachian Mountain Club: $360 → 16%Cornell Lab Ornithology: $180 → 16%Natural Resources Defense Council: $1k → 17%Maine Island Trail Association: $360 → 7%BETH ISRAEL CONGREGATION: $1k → 9%NATURAL RESOURCES COUNCIL OF MAINE: $3k → 12%Union Of Concerned Scientists: $2k → 8%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $1k → 17%Friends of the Kotzschmar Organ: $360 → 7%BETH ISRAEL CONGREGATION: $360 → 9%NATURAL RESOURCES COUNCIL OF MAINE: $2k → 12%UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS: $1k → 8%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $1k → 17%HARPSWELL HERITAGE LAND TRUST: $1k → 7%Marine Mammals Of Maine: $180 → 9%Natural Resources Council Of Maine: $1k → 12%UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS: $1k → 8%NATURUAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $1k → 17%HARPSWELL HERITAGE LAND TRUST: $1k → 7%Maine Coast Heritage Trust: $1k → 9%NATURAL RESOURCES COUNCIL OF MAINE: $1k → 12%UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS: $1k → 8%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $1k → 17%HARPSWELL HERITAGE LAND TRUST: $850 → 7%MAINE COAST HERITAGE TRUST: $1k → 9%NATURAL RESOURCES COUNCIL OF MAINE: $1k → 12%UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS: $1k → 8%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $1k → 17%HARPSWELL HERITAGE LAND TRUST: $720 → 7%MAINE COAST HERITAGE TRUST: $1k → 9%MAINE COAST HERITAGE TRUST: $1k → 9%MAINE COAST HERITAGE TRUST: $1k → 9%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$38k · 6 repeat orgs$2k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +5% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
6

Total granted

$38k
$2k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+5%
0%

Still filing today

83%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentArts & CultureInternationalOther
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

  • NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC
    5× · 2017–2025 · $7k · revenue +41%
  • Maine Coast Heritage Trust
    4× · 2021–2025 · $7k · revenue +5%
  • HH
    Harpswell Heritage Land Trust
    3× · 2021–2024 · $4k · revenue +235%

Funded once

  • Maine Island Trail Association
    one grant, 2025 · $360 · revenue 0%
  • Appalachian Mountain Clubgraduated
    one grant, 2025 · $360 · revenue +32%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF THE KOTZSCHMAR ORGAN INC
    one grant, 2025 · $360 · revenue 0%
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
Wetlands Foundation
Environment
2
Midcoast Conservancy

The mission of Midcoast Conservancy is to protect vital lands and waters on a scale that matters and to inspire wonder and action on behalf of all species and the Earth.

Environment
3
Eastern Maine Conservation Initiative

The Eastern Maine Conservation Initiative (EMCI) is a non-profit organization with broad conservation interests that seeks to: 1) Foster environmentally sustainable communities of the eastern Maine coast; 2) Encourage an appreciation of…

Animals
4
Coastal Mountains Land Trust

We conserve land permanently to benefit the natural and human communities of western the Penobscot Bay region.

Environment
5
Protect Maine's Fishing Heritage Foundation
Environment
6
Maine Rivers

Maine Rivers is a statewide advocacy organization. Our mission is to protect, restore and enhance the ecological health of Maine's river systems. We support and direct efforts to conserve and improve the health of Maine's rivers and…

Environment
7
Forest Society of Maine

The Forest Society of Maine conserves Maine forestlands to sustain their ecological, economic, cultural and recreational values.

Environment
8
Maine Appalachian Trail Land Trust

To preserve and protect land surrounding the appalachian trail in maine for public benefit.

Environment
9
Oceanside Conservation Trust

The organization works to conserve wild or underdeveloped open space, scenic areas, and historic landmarks in the casco bay region.

—
10
Momentum Conservation

To work collectively in maine to create mutually beneficial relationships with the earth, communities, and people through the conservation movement.

Environment
11
Presumpscot Regional Land Trust

We engage with communities to conserve, steward, and provide access to local lands and clean water for current and future generations to enjoy.

—
12
Maine Climate Action Now

MCAN catalyzes transformative education and action in response to the climate crisis. We seek to honor, unite and amplify the voices of youth, frontline communities, and others historically excluded from the climate conversation and…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Natural Resources Council of Maine Inc; the most unlike its peers is Natural Resources Defense Council 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Natural Resources Council of Maine Inc: $8,352 · EnvironmentNatural Resources Council of Maine IncNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $6,858 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INCMaine Coast Heritage Trust: $6,552 · EnvironmentMaine Coast Heritage TrustHarpswell Heritage Land Trust: $3,748 · EnvironmentHarpswell Heritage Land Trust+2 more: $720 · EnvironmentTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $10,926 · InternationalTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTIS…BETH ISRAEL CONGREGATION: $1,440 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $180 · OtherMaine Appalachian Trail Club: $180 · OtherFRIENDS OF THE KOTZSCHMAR ORGAN INC: $360 · Arts & CultureMarine Mammals of Maine: $180 · Arts & Culture
Environment$26,230International$10,926Other$1,800Arts & Culture$540

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $10,926 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetNatural Resources Council of Maine Inc: $8,352 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $6,858 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetMaine Coast Heritage Trust: $6,552 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHarpswell Heritage Land Trust: $3,748 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetMaine Island Trail Association: $360 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE KOTZSCHMAR ORGAN INC: $360 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMaine Appalachian Trail Club: $180 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Maine Community Found…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Maine Community Foundation IncME15.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Maine Community Foundation 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 Carr Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Carr Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Appalachian Mountain Club: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
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 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 Carr Family’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