Skip to content
Highstead Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Highstead Foundation Inc

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.

$214k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$114k
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 2025.

Environment$1.4MEducation$475kFood & Nutrition$1k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $184k
$20,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$5.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF NEW HAMPSHIRE$114,485
Individual grant recipient$69,455
POLLINATOR PATHWAY INC$20,000
ECOLOGICAL HEALTH NETWORK$8,890
THE NORTHEAST ORGANIC FARMING ASSOCIATION OF CONNECTICUT$1,040
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 (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 87% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Lincoln Institute of Land Policy: $70k → 11%ECOLOGICAL HEALTH NETWORK: $9k → 8%Harvard Forest: $275k → 11%UNIVERSTIY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST: $30k → 12%NORWALK LAND TRUST: $2k → 9%YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS: $10k → 12%UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF NEW HAMPSHIRE: $114k → 7%LINCOLN INSTITUTE OF LAND POLICY: $70k → 11%HARVARD FOREST: $254k → 11%NORWALK RIVER WATERSHED ASSOCIATION: $20k → 9%YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS: $3k → 12%UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF NEW HAMPSHIRE: $90k → 7%Lincoln Institute of Land Policy: $70k → 11%HARVARD FOREST: $241k → 11%POLLINATOR PATHWAY INC: $20k → 9%THE NORTHEAST ORGANIC FARMING ASSOCIATION OF CONNECTICUT: $1k → 12%UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF NEW HAMPSHIRE: $32k → 7%LINCOLN INSTITUTE OF LAND POLICY: $16k → 11%Harvard Forest: $225k → 11%NORWALK RIVER WATERSHED ASSOCIATION: $10k → 9%HARVARD FOREST: $201k → 11%NORWALK TREE ALLIANCE: $1k → 9%HARVARD FOREST: $69k → 11%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.
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 71% of Highstead Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 88% of the giving stays in CT; by stated purpose, 17%.

Highstead Foundation Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 70% 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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.8M · 4 repeat orgs$73k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +98% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
4

Total granted

$1.8M
$43k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+98%
0%

Still filing today

50%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentEducationFood & NutritionOther
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

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    6× · 2020–2025 · $1.3M
  • US
    UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
    3× · 2023–2025 · $236k
  • LI
    LINCOLN INSTITUTE OF LAND POLICY
    4× · 2020–2023 · $226k · revenue +98%

Funded once

  • UO
    UNIVERSTIY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST
    one grant, 2023 · $30k
  • CO
    CITY OF NORWALK DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
    one grant, 2022 · $10k
  • NL
    NORWALK LAND TRUST INC
    one grant, 2024 · $2k · revenue -82%
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
Redding Land Trust Inc

The primary mission of Redding Land Trust is to preserve the natural resources of the Town of Redding, CT and to promote the scientific and educational study of local and natural resources, and to acquire, by gift or purchase, land or…

Environment
2
Norfolk Land Trust Inc

TO ENCOURAGE THE PRESERVATION OF OPEN SPACE IN NORFOLK, CT AND surrounding communities FOR THE PUBLIC BENEFIT AND TO SERVE AS A VEHICLE FOR managing and maintaining LAND THAT HAS BEEN SET ASIDE FOR OPEN SPACE PURPOSES: (1) Land easements,…

Environment
3
The Norcross Wildlife Foundation Inc
Animals
4
Kestrel Land Trust

Kestrel land trust conserves and cares for forests, farms, and riverways in the connecticut river valley of western massachusetts while nurturing an enduring love of the land

Environment
5
Nod Road Preservation Inc

Nod Road Preservation, Inc. aims to protect the natural beauty, country peacefulness, and authentic charm associated with Nod Road and the greater Farmington Valley through

Environment
6
Northeast Greenwich Association Incorporated

The purpose of the association is to provide for the protection and general welfare of the residents and owners of real property in the northeastern section of greenwich, connecticut, including the preservation of the residential character…

Community Improvement
7
Candlewood Valley Regional Land Trust

The Candlewood Valley Regional Land Trust protects open spaces that contribute to the Candlewood Valley iconic rural New England character.

—
8
North Stonington Citizens Land Alliance Inc

To obtain property by gift or purchase and to provide for the benefit of the general public the preservation of the land and its natural resources.

—
9
Northern Connecticut Land Trust Inc

Preserve the natural resources on the northern CT region including agricultural land and other ecologically significant open space.

Environment
10
North Central Conservation District Inc

To provide leadership and take initiatives for locally led conservation with the goal to protect soil, water and other natural resources of north central connecticut.

Environment
11
Leland Wild Foundation
Philanthropy
12
Litchfield Land Trust Inc

Help ensure protection of open space land in the town of Litchfield CT by acquiring conservation easements and properties to be held in fee simple in their natural state in perpetuity and by informing and educating the public of the…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northeast Organic Farming Assoc of Connecticut Inc; the most unlike its peers is Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. 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

8 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. 8 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)
8/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $1,266,646 · OtherIndividual grant recipientUNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF NEW HAMPSHIRE: $236,485 · OtherUNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF NEW HAMPSHIRE+4 more: $50,866 · OtherLINCOLN INSTITUTE OF LAND POLICY: $226,174 · EducationLINCOLN INSTIT…Yale University: $12,500 · EducationNorwalk River Watershed Association Inc: $30,378 · EnvironmentPOLLINATOR PATHWAY INC: $20,000 · Environment+1 more: $1,000 · EnvironmentNORTHEAST ORGANIC FARMING ASSOC OF CONNECTICUT INC: $1,040 · Food & Nutrition
Other$1,553,997Education$238,674Environment$51,378Food & Nutrition$1,040

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 budgetLINCOLN INSTITUTE OF LAND POLICY: $226,174 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetNorwalk River Watershed Association Inc: $30,378 over 2y, 10% of budgetPOLLINATOR PATHWAY INC: $20,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetYale University: $12,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNORWALK LAND TRUST INC: $1,980 over 1y, 0.6% 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 Highstead Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Highstead Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 13%
  • Northeast Organic Farming Assoc of Connecticut Inc: 13% of income from government
  • Yale University: 13% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
3report 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 Highstead Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Highstead Foundation Inc 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 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 Highstead’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