Skip to content

· 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.

$430k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$300k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Religion$490kEnvironment$330kEducation$160kPhilanthropy$70kRecreation & Sports$35k
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $15k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $65k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
  • $250k+1 grant · $300k
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NOVUSWAY$300,000
ROCK POINT SCHOOL$50,000
STARK MOUNTAIN FOUNDATION INC$15,000
BLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCY$10,000
CONSERVATION TRUST FOR NORTH CAROLINA$10,000
PIEDMONT LAND CONSERVANCY$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
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 (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 94% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%THE OPTION INSTITUTE AND FELLOWSHIP: $15k → 12%CONSERVATION TRUST FOR NORTH CAROLINA: $10k → 8%NOVUSWAY: $300k → 12%PIEDMONT LAND CONSERVANCY: $10k → 16%BLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCY: $10k → 21%VERMONT CHILDREN'S TRUST FOUNDATION: $10k → 10%THE OPTION INSTITUTE AND FELLOWSHIP: $15k → 12%CONSERVATION TRUST FOR NORTH CAROLINA: $10k → 8%NOVUSWAY: $50k → 12%PIEDMONT LAND CONSERVANCY: $10k → 16%BLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCY: $10k → 21%VERMONT CHILDREN'S TRUST FOUNDATION: $10k → 10%THE OPTION INSTITUTE AND FELLOWSHIP: $15k → 12%CONSERVATION TRUST FOR NORTH CAROLINA: $10k → 8%NOVUSWAY: $10k → 12%PIEDMONT LAND CONSERVANCY: $10k → 16%BLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCY: $10k → 21%VERMONT CHILDREN'S TRUST FOUNDATION: $10k → 10%THE OPTION INSTITUTE AND FELLOWSHIP: $15k → 12%CONSERVATION TRUST FOR NORTH CAROLINA: $10k → 8%NOVUSWAY: $10k → 12%PIEDMONT LAND CONSERVANCY: $10k → 16%BLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCY: $10k → 21%VERMONT CHILDREN'S TRUST FOUNDATION: $10k → 10%THE OPTION INSTITUTE AND FELLOWSHIP: $15k → 12%CONSERVATION TRUST FOR NORTH CAROLINA: $10k → 8%NOVUSWAY: $10k → 12%PIEDMONT LAND CONSERVANCY: $10k → 16%BLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCY: $10k → 21%VERMONT CHILDREN'S TRUST FOUNDATION: $10k → 10%THE OPTION INSTITUTE AND FELLOWSHIP: $15k → 12%CONSERVATION TRUST FOR NORTH CAROLINA: $10k → 8%NOVUSWAY: $10k → 12%PIEDMONT LAND CONSERVANCY: $10k → 16%BLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCY: $10k → 21%VERMONT CHILDREN'S TRUST FOUNDATION: $10k → 10%CONSERVATION TRUST FOR NORTH CAROLINA: $10k → 8%NOVUSWAY: $10k → 12%PIEDMONT LAND CONSERVANCY: $10k → 16%BLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCY: $10k → 21%VERMONT CHILDREN'S TRUST FOUNDATION: $10k → 10%SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY: $10k → 12%STARK MOUNTAIN FOUNDATION INC: $15k → 9%SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY: $10k → 12%SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY: $10k → 12%SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY: $10k → 12%ROCK POINT SCHOOL: $50k → 10%ROCK POINT SCHOOL: $50k → 10%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 11 repeat orgs$15k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +9% since the first grant, against 0% for those 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
1

Total granted

$1.1M
$15k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+9%
0%

Still filing today

82%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentReligionPhilanthropyEducationOther
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

  • Southern Appalachian Highlands Conservancy
    7× · 2019–2025 · $70k · revenue +530%
  • BLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCY
    7× · 2019–2025 · $70k · revenue +9%
  • VC
    Vermont Childrens Trust Foundation
    7× · 2019–2025 · $70k · revenue +12%

Funded once

  • SM
    STARK MOUNTAIN FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2025 · $15k · revenue 0%
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
Lakes Region Conservation Trust

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…

Environment
2
Vermont Trails & Greenways Council

To promote trails and greenways and to ensure that people will always have access to the landscape of vermont.

Environment
3
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
4
Naturaland Trust

Performing activities pursuant to the maintenance and preservation of natural areas for the benefit of the public

Environment
5
The Vermont River Conservancy Inc

Protect land along rivers, lakes and wetlands of vt; protect public access, wildlife habitat, scenic natural beauty, and ecological integrity.

Human Services
6
Mountain Conservation Trust of Georgia Inc

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.

Environment
7
Conserving Carolina

To protect, restore, and inspire appreciation of the natural world.

Environment
8
Vermont Riverlands Llc

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…

Environment
9
Triangle Land Conservancy Inc

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…

Environment
10
Great Mountain Forest Corporation
Philanthropy
11
Placer Land Trust

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.

Environment
12
Vermont Natural Resources Council Inc

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…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Vermont Land Trust Inc; 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.
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 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)
10/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NOVUSWAY INC: $400,000 · OtherNOVUSWAY INCROCK POINT SCHOOL: $125,000 · OtherROCK POINT SCHOOLTHE GREEN MOUNTAIN CLUB INC DEBONIS: $35,000 · OtherTHE GREEN MOUNTAIN CLUB INC DEBONISCONSERVATION TRUST FOR NORTH CAROLINA: $70,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION TRUST FOR NORTH CAROL…Southern Appalachian Highlands Conservancy: $70,000 · EnvironmentSouthern Appalachian Highlands Con…PIEDMONT LAND CONSERVANCY: $70,000 · EnvironmentPIEDMONT LAND CONSERVANCYBLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCY: $70,000 · EnvironmentBLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCYVERMONT LAND TRUST INC: $35,000 · EnvironmentVERMONT LAND TRUST INCSTARK MOUNTAIN FOUNDATION INC: $15,000 · EnvironmentOPTION INSTITUTE AND FELLOWSHIP AUTISM TREATMENT CENTER OF AMERICA: $90,000 · ReligionOPTION IN…Vermont Childrens Trust Foundation: $70,000 · PhilanthropyUNIVERSITY OF VERMONT AND STATE AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC: $35,000 · Education
Other$560,000Environment$330,000Religion$90,000Philanthropy$70,000Education$35,000

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 budgetOPTION INSTITUTE AND FELLOWSHIP AUTISM TREATMENT CENTER OF AMERICA: $90,000 over 6y, 1.4% of budgetCONSERVATION TRUST FOR NORTH CAROLINA: $70,000 over 7y, 0.4% of budgetSouthern Appalachian Highlands Conservancy: $70,000 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetPIEDMONT LAND CONSERVANCY: $70,000 over 7y, 0.6% of budgetBLUE RIDGE CONSERVANCY: $70,000 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetVermont Childrens Trust Foundation: $70,000 over 7y, 1.6% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF VERMONT AND STATE AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC: $35,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetVERMONT LAND TRUST INC: $35,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetTHE GREEN MOUNTAIN CLUB INC DEBONIS: $35,000 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetSTARK MOUNTAIN FOUNDATION INC: $15,000 over 1y, 6.6% 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.

  • 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 ↗

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.

Foundation for the CarolinasNC14.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 John and Barbara McLendon Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from John and Barbara McLendon Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →median 17%
  • 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
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
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 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 John and Barbara McLendon Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph