Skip to content
Gibson Woodbury Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Gibson Woodbury Charitable Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$55k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
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.

Human Services$420kRecreation & Sports$274kArts & Culture$192kFood & Nutrition$175kEducation$62kHealth$37kEnvironment$35kCommunity Improvement$20kOther$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k10 grants · $35k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
$3,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$3.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NORTH CONWAY COMMUNITY CENTER$20,000
VAUGHN COMMUNITY CENTER$5,000
CHILDREN UNLIMITED$5,000
END 68 HOURS OF HUNGER$5,000
TIN MOUNTAIN CONSERVATION CENTER$5,000
EASTERN SLOPE SKI CLUB$3,000
WHITE MOUNTAIN BIKE COALITION$2,500
THE CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER$2,500
Individual grant recipient$2,500
STARTING POINT$2,000
THE LAURA FOUNDATION FOR AUTISM AND EPILEPSY$2,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–25, $382k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CHILDREN UNLIMITED: $5k → 9%NORTH CONWAY COMMUNITY CENTER: $121k → 9%NORTH CONWAY COMMUNITY CENTER: $77k → 9%NORTH CONWAY COMMUNITY CENTER: $48k → 9%NORTH CONWAY COMMUNITY CENTER: $29k → 9%NORTH CONWAY COMMUNITY CENTER: $24k → 9%NORTH CONWAY COMMUNITY CENTER: $20k → 9%NORTH CONWAY COMMUNITY CENTER: $20k → 9%NORTH CONWAY COMMUNITY CENTER: $20k → 9%VISITING NURSES HOME CARE & HOSPICE OF CARROLL COUNTY: $10k → 9%GIBSON CENTER FOR SENIOR SERVICES: $8k → 9%NORTH CONWAY COMMUNITY CENTER: $750 → 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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.0M · 15 repeat orgs$214k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +39% since the first grant, against -1% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
14

Total granted

$1.0M
$194k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
-1%

Still filing today

60%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 62% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $21k 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
Recreation & SportsHuman ServicesEducationFood & NutritionArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • TM
    TIN MOUNTAIN CONSERVATION CENTER INC
    2× · 2022–2025 · $20k · revenue +72%
  • RC
    ROTARY CLUB OF NORTH CONWAY CHARITIES INC
    2× · 2017–2022 · $16k · revenue +11% · 25% of their budget
  • ES
    EASTERN SLOPE AVIATION ACADEMY
    2× · 2022–2023 · $15k · revenue +240%

Funded once

  • WM
    WEST MAIN RECREATION CORP
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -1%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF CONWAY RECREATION INC
    one grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue -46% · 27% of their budget
  • MW
    MOUNT WASHINGTON VALLEY PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue -59%
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
Mount Washington Valley Trails Association

Mwv trails is a nh non-profit dedicated to the creation of a sustainable off-road non-motorized trail network in the mount washington valley of new hampshire, focusing on public use trails designed for mountain bike, trail running and…

Recreation & Sports
2
Connecticut Valley Sno-Riders Inc

Connecticut valley sno-riders, inc. is a volunteer organization founded in 1973 which maintains more than 80 miles of groomed snowmobile trails in vermont.

—
3
Mt Ascutney Outdoors Inc

Mt. Ascutney Outdoors, Inc's mission is to promote vitality within the community by providing affordable and unique recreational, cultural and educational activities to local residents and visitors from the Upper Valley region of Vermont…

Recreation & Sports
4
Mountain Conservancy of Northern New England

Promotion of the conservation and protection of natural resources in the mountains of northern new england

—
5
Wolfeboro Cross Country Ski Association

To maintain cross country ski trails for the town of wolfeboro for the benefit of the citizenry and to promote local tourism interests and, thereby, to stimulate job creation.

Community Improvement
6
New Hampshire Outdoor Council

To provide funding for backcountry search and rescue promote safe and responsible use of the backcountry and outdoors by providing information and education

—
7
New England Nordic Ski Association Inc

Increase participation in cross country skiing

Recreation & Sports
8
Ford K Sayre Memorial Ski Council Inc

The council organizes snowsports instruction and racing programs for over 500 children in the upper valley area of vermont and new hampshire

—
9
Black Mountain of Maine Attn Roger Arsenault

Black mountain is dedicated to re-establishing skiing as a lifestyle in the river valley providing a safe environment for winter activities that is accessible, family oriented and devoted to making a difference in people's lives.

Recreation & Sports
10
Vermont Ski Museum Inc

To collect preserve and celebrate vermont's skiing history.

Philanthropy
11
Mt Washington Valley Alpine Education Foundation

To provide education instruction to boys and girls in the sport of skiing, physical fitness, leadership and sportsmanship. formal skiing instruction is provided and students participate in skiing related races and events.

Education
12
Upper Valley Snow Sports Foundation

The upper valley snow sports foundation's mission is to sustain whaleback ski area as a community sports facility that welcomes everyone to discover a lifelong joy of snow sports.

Recreation & Sports
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is North Conway Community Center; the most unlike its peers is White Mountain Bike Coalition. 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

21 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. 21 of the 35 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
9/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NORTH CONWAY COMMUNITY CENTER: $359,650 · Human ServicesNORTH CONWAY COMMUNITY CENTER+3 more: $22,500 · Human Services+3 moreVAUGHN COMMUNITY CENTER: $170,000 · OtherVAUGHN COMMUNITY CENTERMWV TRAILS ASSOCIATION: $105,000 · OtherMWV TRAILS ASSOCIATIONBETTY KETCHUM FOUNDATION - MWV ADULT DAY CARE CENTER: $43,000 · OtherBETTY KETCHUM FOUNDATION - MWV ADULT D…UPPER SACO VALLEY LAND TRUST: $15,000 · Other+15 more: $81,000 · Other+15 moreNEW ENGLAND SKI MUSEUM INC: $182,895 · Arts & CultureNEW ENGLAND SKI …Kevin Peare Memorial Skate Park: $50,000 · Recreation & SportsKevin Peare Me…WEST MAIN RECREATION CORP: $50,000 · Recreation & SportsWEST MAIN RECR…FRIENDS OF CONWAY RECREATION INC: $50,000 · Recreation & SportsFRIENDS OF CON…+2 more: $5,500 · Recreation & SportsROTARY CLUB OF NORTH CONWAY CHARITIES INC: $16,000 · EducationEASTERN SLOPE AVIATION ACADEMY: $15,000 · EducationMT WASHINGTON VALLEY SCHOOL TO CAREER PARTNERSHIP: $10,000 · EducationKISMET ROCK FOUNDATION: $8,000 · EducationMOUNT WASHINGTON VALLEY PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION: $20,000 · Community ImprovementTIN MOUNTAIN CONSERVATION CENTER INC: $20,000 · Environment
Human Services$382,150Other$414,000Arts & Culture$182,895Recreation & Sports$155,500Education$49,000Community Improvement$20,000Environment$20,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNORTH CONWAY COMMUNITY CENTER: $359,650 over 9y, 19% of budgetNEW ENGLAND SKI MUSEUM INC: $182,895 over 6y, 25% of budgetKevin Peare Memorial Skate Park: $50,000 over 2y, 18% of budgetWEST MAIN RECREATION CORP: $50,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetFRIENDS OF CONWAY RECREATION INC: $50,000 over 1y, 27% of budgetMOUNT WASHINGTON VALLEY PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION: $20,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetTIN MOUNTAIN CONSERVATION CENTER INC: $20,000 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetROTARY CLUB OF NORTH CONWAY CHARITIES INC: $16,000 over 2y, 25% of budgetEASTERN SLOPE AVIATION ACADEMY: $15,000 over 2y, 4.3% of budgetUPPER SACO VALLEY LAND TRUST: $15,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetJENS FRIENDS CANCER FOUNDATION: $13,000 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetVisiting Nurse Home Care & Hospice of Carroll County: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetPOPE MEMORIAL LIBRARY: $10,000 over 1y, 3.9% of budgetMT WASHINGTON VALLEY SCHOOL TO CAREER PARTNERSHIP: $10,000 over 3y, 18% of budgetKISMET ROCK FOUNDATION: $8,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetGIBSON CENTER FOR SENIOR SERVICES INC: $7,500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetEND 68 HOURS OF HUNGER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCHILDREN UNLIMITED INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetEASTERN SLOPE SKI CLUB: $3,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetCHILD ADVOCACY CENTER OF COOS COUNTY: $2,500 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetWHITE MOUNTAIN BIKE COALITION: $2,500 over 1y, 4.2% 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.

New Hampshire Charita…The Robert and Doroth…Cogswell Benevolent T…Agnes M Lindsay TrustEversource Energy Fou…The Pfizer Foundation…Morgan Stanley Global…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
New Hampshire Charitable FoundationNH36.3× affinity16 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: New Hampshire Charitable Foundation · The Robert and Dorothy Goldberg Charitable Foundation · Cogswell Benevolent Trust · Agnes M Lindsay Trust · Eversource Energy Foundation Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Gibson Woodbury Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Gibson Woodbury Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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 Gibson Woodbury Charitable Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Gibson Woodbury Charitable Foundation 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 35 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 Gibson Woodbury’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