Skip to content
Morey & Anne Chapman Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Morey & Anne Chapman Family Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$629k
Granted FY2023
9
Grants FY2023
6
States reached
$200k
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 2023.

Environment$846kPhilanthropy$360kReligion$300kAnimals$106kFood & Nutrition$2kScience & Tech$1kHealth$1kInternational$900Other$0
02FY2023 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $94k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $530k
$30,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$3.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
KEEPING TRACK INC$200,000
NORTHEAST WILDERNESS TRUST$120,000
THE WHITE ROSE FOUNDATION$120,000
JEWISH UNITED FUND$90,000
GLOBAL JUSTICE ECOLOGY PROJECT INC$30,000
INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE$26,000
DELTA RESCUE$20,000
WATERSHEDS UNITED VERMONT INC$17,690
TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND$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:

Its human-services grants (FY19–19, $400) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT: $400 → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

VT
IL
NY
MA
CA
MD
TX
FL
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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.5M · 9 repeat orgs$95k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +54% since the first grant, against +53% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2023, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
14

Total granted

$1.5M
$95k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+54%
+53%

Still filing today

100%
79%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’23
EnvironmentAnimalsPhilanthropyScience & TechHuman ServicesFood & 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

  • KT
    Keeping Track Inc
    3× · 2020–2023 · $383k · revenue +34% · 78% of their budget
  • JU
    JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO
    6× · 2017–2023 · $360k · revenue +13%
  • WR
    WHITE ROSE FOUNDATION
    4× · 2019–2023 · $300k · revenue +5% · 64% of their budget

Funded once

  • SW
    SANDBHREAGH WILDLANDS SANCTUARY AND TRUSgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue ×12
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF THE WINOOSKI RIVER INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $38k · revenue +146%
  • NI
    NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK
    one grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue +8%
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
Rainforest Trust

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

International
2
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
3
Wildlands Trust Inc

The wildlands trust works throughout southeastern massachusetts to conserve and permanently protect native habitats, farmland, and lands of high ecologic and scenic value that serve to keep our communities healthy and our residents…

Environment
4
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
5
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
6
Wildearth Guardians

Wildearth guardians works to protect and restore the wildlife, wild places, wild rivers, and health of the american west.

Unclassified
7
Defenders of Wildlife

Defenders of Wildlife is a national, nonprofit membership organization dedicated to the protection of all native animals and plants in their natural communities.

Animals
8
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
9
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.

Animals
10
Wildlife Conservation Network Inc

Connect conservationists and supporters, deploy resources to the field, provide conservationists with tools and support they need to succeed.

Animals
11
NatureServe

NatureServe's mission is to leverage the power of science, data, and technology to guide biodiversity conservation and stewardship. We activate our mission by working with a network of 60+ partners located in states and provinces across…

Environment
12
WildTrack Inc

To improve endangered species monitoring to protect endangered species, focusing on non-invasive, cost-effective and community friendly methods, ultimately towards mitigating human wildlife conflict and stopping the illegal trafficking of…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northeast Wilderness Trust Corporation; the most unlike its peers is Sandbhreagh Wildlands Sanctuary and Trus. 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

20 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. 20 of the 23 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
18/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Keeping Track Inc: $383,000 · AnimalsKeeping Track IncINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC: $65,000 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELF…Dedication and Everlasting Love to Animals: $40,000 · AnimalsDedication and Everlasting Love to…+1 more: $500 · AnimalsNORTHEAST WILDERNESS TRUST CORPORATION: $252,000 · EnvironmentNORTHEAST WILDERNESS TRUST CORPO…WATERSHEDS UNITED VERMONT INC: $55,690 · EnvironmentWATERSHEDS UNITED VERMONT INCSANDBHREAGH WILDLANDS SANCTUARY AND TRUS: $50,000 · EnvironmentSANDBHREAGH WILDLANDS SANCTUARY …GLOBAL JUSTICE ECOLOGY PROJECT INC: $45,000 · EnvironmentGLOBAL JUSTICE ECOLOGY PROJECT I…FRIENDS OF THE WINOOSKI RIVER INC: $38,000 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE WINOOSKI RIVER IN…THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND: $22,000 · EnvironmentJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $360,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH UNITED FUND OF MET…+1 more: $400 · PhilanthropyWHITE ROSE FOUNDATION: $300,000 · ReligionWHITE ROSE FOUNDATIONNORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK: $2,000 · Food & NutritionAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL USA: $400 · OtherCHICAGOLAND HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $400 · OtherPOLARIS PROJECT: $400 · OtherWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $400 · OtherGUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND INC: $400 · OtherInternational OCD Foundation Inc: $600 · OtherMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $500 · OtherSETI INSTITUTE: $500 · Science & TechINSTITUTE OF NOETIC SCIENCES: $500 · Science & Tech
Animals$488,500Environment$462,690Philanthropy$360,400Religion$300,000Food & Nutrition$2,000Other$3,100Science & Tech$1,000

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 budgetKeeping Track Inc: $383,000 over 3y, 78% of budgetJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $360,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetWHITE ROSE FOUNDATION: $300,000 over 4y, 64% of budgetNORTHEAST WILDERNESS TRUST CORPORATION: $252,000 over 3y, 2.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC: $65,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetWATERSHEDS UNITED VERMONT INC: $55,690 over 2y, 8.2% of budgetGLOBAL JUSTICE ECOLOGY PROJECT INC: $45,000 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetDedication and Everlasting Love to Animals: $40,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE WINOOSKI RIVER INC: $38,000 over 1y, 7.8% of budgetTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND: $22,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetInternational OCD Foundation Inc: $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSETI INSTITUTE: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINSTITUTE OF NOETIC SCIENCES: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE DAVID SHELDRICK WILDLIFE TRUST USA INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND INC: $400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDAVID LYNCH FOUNDATION FOR CONSCIOUSNESS -BASED EDUCATION AND WORLD PEACE: $400 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Lintilhac Foundation …The Vermont Community…Marin Community Found…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Network for GoodNational Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Lintilhac Foundation IncVT13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Lintilhac Foundation Inc · The Vermont Community Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Morey & Anne Chapman Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Morey & Anne Chapman Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • Watersheds United Vermont Inc: 95% of income from government
  • Friends of the Winooski River Inc: 7% of income from government
  • Northeast Wilderness Trust Corporation: 2% of income from government
  • Wounded Warrior Project Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely 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 Morey & Anne Chapman Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Morey & Anne Chapman Family 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 23 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.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Morey & Anne Chapman Family’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