Skip to content
Fieldstone 1793 Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Fieldstone 1793 Foundation

Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$159k
Granted FY2023
10
Grants FY2023
5
States reached
$75k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2023.

Health$303kArts & Culture$176kReligion$150kEnvironment$66kEducation$65kSocial Science$50kCivil Rights$15kAnimals$10kOther$0
02FY2023 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k4 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $70k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
$10,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ONE ELEUTHERA FOUNDATION$75,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD KEYSTONE$25,000
POCONO HEALTH FOUNDATION$15,000
LAND TRUST ALLIANCE$10,000
PETER'S PLACE$10,000
NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION$10,000
THE MILL AT ANSELMA PRESERVATION$5,000
NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION$5,000
THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY$3,000
CLAN MACNEIL ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA INC$513
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.

US giving: 83% of grant dollars ($710k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 17% that went abroad ($150k) is mapped below.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY22–22, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%BRIDGE OF HOPE: $5k → 9%NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERICA: $15k → 14%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.

Beyond the US: 17% of all-years giving ($150k)

1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Bahamas$150k · 2 grants
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 6% of Fieldstone 1793 Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Fieldstone 1793 Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 17% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$645k · 9 repeat orgs$155k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +39% since the first grant, against +9% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2023, 3 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
12

Total granted

$645k
$117k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
+9%

Still filing today

56%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $39k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’22’23
EnvironmentHealthArts & CultureHuman ServicesAnimalsYouth 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

  • PT
    PRESERVATION TRUST OF VERMONT INC
    3× · 2018–2020 · $150k · revenue +231%
  • NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION
    2× · 2022–2023 · $35k · revenue +7%
  • LT
    LAND TRUST ALLIANCE INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $20k · revenue +40%

Funded once

  • AT
    AARON T BECK INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2022 · $50k
  • RF
    REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL
    one grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue +4%
  • TC
    THE CENTER OF AN AGRICULTURAL ECONOMY
    one grant, 2022 · $10k
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
Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy

We improve quality of life by enhancing and stewarding pittsburgh's parks in partnership with the community.

Recreation & Sports
2
Native Plant Trust Inc

The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.

Environment
3
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
4
Property and Environment Research Center

Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.

Public Benefit
5
The Trustees of Reservations

Overview - founded in boston by pioneering landscape architect and open space visionary charles eliot in 1891, the trustees is the nation's first and the commonwealth's largest conservation and preservation nonprofit.

Environment
6
Western Pennsylvania Conservancy

The western pennsylvania conservancy protects and restores exceptional places to provide our region with clean waters and healthy forests, wildlife and natural areas for the benefit of present and future generations. the conservancy…

Environment
7
Lancaster County Conservancy

The mission of the lancaster county conservancy is "providing wild and forested lands and clean waterways for our community forever". the charitable purposes of the lancaster county conservancy include preservation of natural lands,…

Environment
8
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
9
The Trustees of Princeton University

Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…

Education
10
Washington Forest Law Center

Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.

—
11
New Jersey Conservation Foundation

Recognizing that a healthy environment is critical to the well-being and survival of all living things, new jersey conservation foundation is devoted to preserving land and protecting natural resources throughout new jersey's (continued on…

Environment
12
Vermont Land Trust Inc

Rooted in vermont since 1977, the vermont land trust unites land and lives for the enduring benefit of people and the place we share. we help people protect, care for, and connect to land. this includes the farms, forests, natural areas,…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Wilderness Society; the most unlike its peers is National Wildlife Federation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

17 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 17 of the 26 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)
17/17
Grantees still filing
12/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA HEALTH SYSTEM: $225,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA HEALTH SYSTEMONE ELEUTHERA FOUNDATION: $150,000 · OtherONE ELEUTHERA FOUNDATIONAARON T BECK INSTITUTE: $50,000 · OtherAARON T BECK INSTITUTE+6 more: $43,513 · Other+6 morePRESERVATION TRUST OF VERMONT INC: $150,000 · Arts & CulturePRESERVATION TRUST …+1 more: $1,000 · Arts & CulturePOCONO HEALTH FOUNDATION: $30,000 · HealthPOCONO HE…PLANNED PARENTHOOD KEYSTONE: $25,000 · HealthPLANNED P…PAOLI MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $10,000 · HealthPAOLI MEM…LIVING BEYOND BREAST CANCER: $5,000 · HealthLIVING BE…COMMUNITY VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE: $5,000 · HealthCOMMUNITY…NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $35,000 · EnvironmentLAND TRUST ALLIANCE INC: $20,000 · EnvironmentNatural Lands Trust Inc: $5,000 · EnvironmentTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $3,000 · EnvironmentFRENCH AND PICKERING CREEKS CONSERVATION TRUST INC: $2,500 · EnvironmentTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $60,000 · EducationREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL: $15,000 · Human ServicesBRIDGE OF HOPE INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $10,000 · AnimalsPETER'S PLACE: $10,000 · Youth Development
Other$468,513Arts & Culture$151,000Health$75,000Environment$65,500Education$60,000Human Services$20,000Animals$10,000Youth Development$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPRESERVATION TRUST OF VERMONT INC: $150,000 over 3y, 2.7% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $60,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $35,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPOCONO HEALTH FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 2y, 5.9% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD KEYSTONE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetLAND TRUST ALLIANCE INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPAOLI MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPETER'S PLACE: $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetBRIDGE OF HOPE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetLIVING BEYOND BREAST CANCER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNatural Lands Trust Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRENCH AND PICKERING CREEKS CONSERVATION TRUST INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

The Pfizer Foundation…Vanguard Charitable E…American Endowment Fo…The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Pfizer Foundation IncNY10.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving 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 Fieldstone 1793 Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Fieldstone 1793 Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 29%
  • Preservation Trust of Vermont Inc: 29% of 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
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 26 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Fieldstone 1793’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