· Private foundation
John and Barbara McLendon 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.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 52% of JOHN AND BARBARA MCLENDON FAMILY FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k3 grants · $15k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $65k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
- $250k+1 grant · $300k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NOVUSWAY | $300,000 |
| ROCK POINT SCHOOL | $50,000 |
| STARK MOUNTAIN FOUNDATION INC | $15,000 |
| PIEDMONT LAND CONSERVANCY | $10,000 |
| BLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCY | $10,000 |
| CONSERVATION TRUST FOR NORTH CAROLINA | $10,000 |
| SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY | $10,000 |
| VERMONT CHILDREN'S TRUST FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| THE GREEN MOUNTAIN CLUB INC | $5,000 |
| THE UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| VERMONT LAND TRUST INC | $5,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 94% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +9% since the first grant, against -68% for the ones you funded once.
11 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
Southern Appalachian Highlands Conservancy7× · 2019–2025 · $70k · revenue +530%
BLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCY7× · 2019–2025 · $70k · revenue +9%- VCVermont Childrens Trust Foundation7× · 2019–2025 · $70k · revenue +12%
Funded once
- SMSTARK MOUNTAIN FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2025 · $15k · revenue -68%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
The mission of the Organization is the conservation of the natural resources of the Lakes Region of New Hampshire, the preservation of wildlife habitat, the stewardship of lands that define the character of the region and its quality of…
To promote trails and greenways and to ensure that people will always have access to the landscape of vermont.
To conserve the rural, natural, and cultural heritage of the new river region, protecting farms, forests, open spaces, and historic places.
Performing activities pursuant to the maintenance and preservation of natural areas for the benefit of the public
Protect land along rivers, lakes and wetlands of vt; protect public access, wildlife habitat, scenic natural beauty, and ecological integrity.
To promote permanent conservation of the natural resources and scenic beauty of the mountains and foothills of north georgia through land protection, collaborative partnerships and education.
To protect, restore, and inspire appreciation of the natural world.
To protect and enhance the natural resources of vermont in order to promote the well-being of present and future generations of vermonters and visitors; preserve and aid in the preservation of open land along rivers and lakes; protect and…
Triangle land conservancy (tlc) strives to create a healthier and more vibrant triangle region by safeguarding clean water, protecting natural habitats, supporting local farms, and connecting people with nature through land protection and…
Placer Land Trust works with willing landowners and conservation partners to permanently protect and care for natural and agricultural lands in Placer County for current and future generations.
Through research, education, collaboration and advocacy, vnrc protects and enhances vermont's natural environments, vibrant communities, productive working landscapes, rural character and unique sense of place, and prepares the state for…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Vermont Land Trust Inc and the most unlike its peers is Option Institute and Fellowship Autism Treatment Center of America. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
10 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, 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; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds OPTION INSTITUTE AND FELLOWSHIP AUTISM TREATMENT CENTER OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION TRUST FOR NORTH CAROLINA ↗
- Who funds Southern Appalachian Highlands Conservancy ↗
- Who funds PIEDMONT LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds BLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Vermont Childrens Trust Foundation ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT AND STATE AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds VERMONT LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds THE GREEN MOUNTAIN CLUB INC DEBONIS ↗
- Who funds STARK MOUNTAIN FOUNDATION INC ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Foundation for the Carolinas · Duke Energy Foundation · The Cannon Foundation Inc · The Winston-Salem Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization John and Barbara McLendon Family Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Vermont Land Trust Inc — 42% of income from government
- The Green Mountain Club Inc Debonis — 17% of income from government
- Vermont Childrens Trust Foundation — 8% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.