Skip to content
Center for Heirs' Property Preservation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Center for Heirs' Property Preservation

(See Schedule O)

$940k
Granted FY2024still arriving
10
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$305k
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, FY2020 to 2024.

Crime & Legal$789kInternational$305kFood & Nutrition$185kEmployment$90kHousing & Shelter$84kEnvironment$68kAnimals$8k
02FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $50k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $324k
  • $250k+2 grants · $561k
$76,146
Median grant
5
States reached
$8.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Livelihoods Knowledge Exchange Network Inc$304,864
Legal Services Alabama Inc$256,248
Mississippi Center for Justice$98,387
University of Arkansas Pine Bluff$84,075
Mississippi Association of Cooperatives$76,146
The Economic Opportunity Center Inc$65,000
LR Lean Inc$22,480
Winston County Self Help Cooperative$14,070
Coastal Carolina University$13,000
Winyah Rivers Alliance$6,181
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:

Its human-services grants (FY20–24, $90k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY CENTER: $25k → 10%The Economic Opportunity Center Inc: $65k → 12%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.

71%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 6 repeat orgs$446k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
3

Total granted

$1.1M
$22k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+44%
+187%

Still filing today

100%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $424k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentCrime & LegalFood & NutritionInternationalEducationHuman ServicesOther
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

  • LS
    LEGAL SERVICES ALABAMA INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $336k · revenue +12%
  • MA
    Mississippi Association of Cooperatives Inc
    3× · 2022–2024 · $126k · revenue +44%
  • EO
    ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY CENTER
    2× · 2020–2024 · $90k · revenue +74%

Funded once

  • NA
    NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC
    one grant, 2023 · $8k
  • NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $8k · revenue +32%
  • AMERICAN RIVERS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $6k · revenue +187%
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
Ala-Tom Rc&D Council Inc

Resource conservation and development

Environment
2
Oregon Agricultural Trust

Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.

Environment
3
Land Conservancy of West Michigan

Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…

Environment
4
Alabama Rivers Alliance Inc

Alabama Rivers Alliance is a statewide network of groups working to protect and restore all of Alabama's water resources through building partnerships, empowering citizens, and advocating for sound water policy and its enforcement.

Environment
5
America's Watershed Initiative

America's watershed initiative serves as a trusted voice that brings partners together and champions sound science to secure a future in which the rivers and people of the mississippi river watershed thrive.

Human Services
6
The Montana Land Reliance

The mission of the montana land reliance (mlr) is to partner with landowners to provide permanent protection for private lands that are significant for agricultural production, fish and wildlife habitat, and open space.

Environment
7
Mattole Restoration Council

The restoration of natural systems in the mattole valley watershed and their maintenance at sustainable levels of health and productivity, especially in regards to forests, fisheries, soils, and other native plant and animal communities.

Environment
8
Alabama Association of Conservation Districts Inc

The alabama association of conservation districts (aacd) is the unified voice of alabama's 67 conservation districts. organized as a 501(c)3, aacd works in cooperation with the alabama soil & water conservation committee, federal, state,…

Environment
9
Land Trust for the Mississippi Coastal Plain

To conserve, promote, and protect the open spaces and green places of ecological cultural or scenic significance in the counties of the mississippi coastal plain.

Environment
10
The United States Business Council Sustainable Development

Promotion of sustainable development in the united states.

Community Improvement
11
Watershed Conservation Resource Center

The watershed conservation resource center strives to protect, conserve, and restore natural resources by utilizing the watershed approach, environmental outreach, and providing planning and technical assistance to landowners, communities,…

Environment
12
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators

The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mississippi Center for Justice; the most unlike its peers is National Audubon Society 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 13 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
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MISSISSIPPI CENTER FOR JUSTICE: $453,060 · Crime & LegalMISSISSIPPI CENTER FOR JUSTICELEGAL SERVICES ALABAMA INC: $336,248 · Crime & LegalLEGAL SERVICES ALABAMA INCLIVELIHOODS KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE NETWORK INC: $304,864 · InternationalLIVELIHOODS KNOWLEDGE …Mississippi Association of Cooperatives Inc: $126,146 · Food & NutritionMississippi A…WINSTON COUNTY SELF HELP COOPERATIVE: $59,211 · Food & NutritionWINSTON COUNT…UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE: $84,075 · OtherCOASTAL CAROLINA UNIVERSITY: $13,000 · OtherNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $8,138 · OtherECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY CENTER: $90,000 · Human ServicesWinyah Rivers Foundation Inc: $18,846 · EnvironmentNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $7,500 · EnvironmentAMERICAN RIVERS INC: $6,000 · EnvironmentLRLEAN INC: $22,480 · Education
Crime & Legal$789,308International$304,864Food & Nutrition$185,357Other$105,213Human Services$90,000Environment$32,346Education$22,480

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 budgetMISSISSIPPI CENTER FOR JUSTICE: $453,060 over 4y, 3.8% of budgetLEGAL SERVICES ALABAMA INC: $336,248 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetLIVELIHOODS KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE NETWORK INC: $304,864 over 1y, 20% of budgetMississippi Association of Cooperatives Inc: $126,146 over 3y, 12% of budgetECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY CENTER: $90,000 over 2y, 16% of budgetWINSTON COUNTY SELF HELP COOPERATIVE: $59,211 over 2y, 5.7% of budgetLRLEAN INC: $22,480 over 1y, 7.8% of budgetWinyah Rivers Foundation Inc: $18,846 over 2y, 3.7% of budgetNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $7,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN RIVERS INC: $6,000 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Center for Heirs' Property Preservation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Center for Heirs' Property Preservation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s 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)
    0rely 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Center for Heirs' Property Preservation?

    Find your warmest path to Center for Heirs' Property Preservation 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 13 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Center for Heirs' Property Preservation’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