Skip to content
Nami North Carolina Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Nami North Carolina Inc

The mission of nami north carolina is to promote recovery and optimize the quality of life for those living with mental illness.

$511k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$90k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2025.

Health$330kEducation$31kPublic Safety & Disaster$19kCivil Rights$6k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 10 grants below total $315,188, the rows itemized in this filing. The $511,362 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $196,174 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $217k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $90k
$29,273
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NAMI CHARLOTTE$90,050
NAMI GUILFORD$46,914
NAMI SOUTH MOUNTAINS NC$30,737
NAMI WAKE COUNTY$29,916
NAMI WESTERN CAROLINA$29,273
NAMI CABARRUS COUNTY$22,557
NAMI WILMINGTON$20,156
NAMI HIGH COUNTRY$19,445
NAMI CUMBERLAND HARNETT AND LEE COUNTIES$17,766
NAMI NW PIEDMONT NC$8,374
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 (FY22–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 88% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%NAMI WAKE COUNTY: $30k → 8%NAMI CHARLOTTE: $90k → 10%NAMI WESTERN CAROLINA: $29k → 12%NAMI CUMBERLAND HARNETT AND LEE COUNTIES: $18k → 16%NAMI NW PIEDMONT NC: $8k → 16%NAMI SOUTH MOUNTAINS NC: $31k → 16%NAMI HIGH COUNTRY: $19k → 21%NAMI WAKE COUNTY: $6k → 8%NAMI CHARLOTTE: $9k → 10%NAMI WESTERN CAROLINA: $5k → 12%NAMI CUMBERLAND HARNETT AND LEE COUNTIES: $9k → 16%DISABILITY ADVOCACY CENTER: $6k → 16%NAMI HIGH COUNTRY: $11k → 21%NAMI CUMBERLAND HARNETT AND LEE COUNTIES: $6k → 16%NAMI HIGH COUNTRY: $10k → 21%NAMI HIGH COUNTRY: $9k → 21%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.

65%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$252k · 5 repeat orgs$135k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue 0% since the first grant, against -17% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
1

Total granted

$252k
$6k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
-17%

Still filing today

60%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 59% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $129k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
HealthEducationCivil RightsOther
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

  • NC
    NAMI - Charlotte PKA Alliance for the Mentally Ill
    2× · 2024–2025 · $99k · revenue 0%
  • NH
    NAMI HIGH COUNTRY
    4× · 2022–2025 · $49k
  • NW
    NAMI WAKE COUNTY
    2× · 2024–2025 · $36k · revenue 0%

Funded once

  • DA
    DISABILITY ADVOCACY CENTER
    one grant, 2023 · $6k · revenue -17%
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
Nami White Mountains Az

We represent a community of people who are committed to relieving the pain and suffering of families and peers whose lives are impacted by a Mental Health Condition. The NAMI approach has been proven to work across the United States! NAMI…

Health
2
Nami Mid-Hudson Inc

NAMI Mid-Hudson is a mental health organization dedicated to building better lives for Ulster and Dutchess County residents living in New York and provides Mental Health Education,Support and Advocacy

—
3
Nami North Carolina Inc

The mission of nami north carolina is to promote recovery and optimize the quality of life for those living with mental illness.

—
4
Nami Piedmont Tri-County

Our mission is to rebuild hope where it's been damaged or lost. We work with those in need, who are underprivileged, and underserved to rebuild hope and recovery for those affected by mental health conditions. Our focus lies on community…

Health
5
Nami Rhode Island

The mission of NAMI Rhode Island is to educate the public about mental illness; to offer resources and support to all whose lives are touched by mental illness; to advocate at every level to ensure the rights and dignity of those with…

Health
6
Nami Boulder County

NAMI provides advocacy, education, support and public awareness so that all individuals and families affected by mental illness can build better lives.

Health
7
National Alliance on Mental Illness New Mexico

The organization is dedicated to improving the quality of life for New Mexicans who suffer from mental illness.

—
8
National Alliance on Mental Illness Utah

To improve the quality of life for individuals affected by mental health conditions, as well as their families, through advocacy, education, and support. We are committed to ensuring the dignity of those living with mental illness by…

—
9
Nami Mobile

Nami mobile's mission is to offer support services and programs to those affected by mental illness.

—
10
Nami Linn County

Improving the quality of life for people with mental illness

Health
11
Nami Frederick County Inc

Our mission is to provide information, understanding, education, and support for persons experiencing mental illness and their families. We are an all volunteer organization that provides its services and information materials free of…

—
12
Nami-Amador

NAMI Amador is a grassroots, family and consumer self-help support and advocacy organization dedicated to improving the lives of people with severe mental illnesses, i.e., schizophrenia, bipolar disorder (manic depression), clinical…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nami Western Carolina Inc; the most unlike its peers is Disability Advocacy Center. 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

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2018–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2018 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 11 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
1/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NAMI - Charlotte PKA Alliance for the Mentally Ill: $98,967 · OtherNAMI - Charlotte PKA Alliance for the Mentally IllNAMI HIGH COUNTRY: $49,237 · OtherNAMI HIGH COUNTRYNAMI GUILFORD COUNTY INC: $46,914 · OtherNAMI GUILFORD COUNTY INCNAMI WAKE COUNTY: $35,684 · OtherNAMI WAKE COUNTYNAMI Western Carolina Inc: $34,757 · OtherNAMI Western Carolina IncNAMI CUMBERLAND HARNETT AND LEE COUNTIES: $32,914 · OtherNAMI CUMBERLAND HARNETT AND LEE COUNTIES+1 more: $8,374 · OtherNAMI South Mountains NC: $30,737 · HealthNAMI South Mou…NAMI-WILMINGTON: $20,156 · HealthNAMI-WILMINGTO…National Alliance on Mental Illness Cabarrus County: $22,557 · EducationDISABILITY ADVOCACY CENTER: $6,086 · Civil Rights
Other$306,847Health$50,893Education$22,557Civil Rights$6,086

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

25%50%75%100%$100kgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNAMI - Charlotte PKA Alliance for the Mentally Ill: $98,967 over 2y, 2.3% of budgetNAMI WAKE COUNTY: $35,684 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetNAMI Western Carolina Inc: $34,757 over 2y, 9.5% of budgetNAMI South Mountains NC: $30,737 over 1y, 45% of budgetNational Alliance on Mental Illness Cabarrus County: $22,557 over 1y, 30% of budgetNAMI-WILMINGTON: $20,156 over 1y, 24% of budgetDISABILITY ADVOCACY CENTER: $6,086 over 1y, 1.0% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.3× affinity8 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Nami North Carolina Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Nami North Carolina Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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 11 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 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 Nami North Carolina’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