Skip to content
National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements

National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements (NC-SARA) is committed to supporting the establishment of an effective and efficient state-level reciprocity process that will allow students across the country to enjoy increased access to higher education opportunities and will reflect the core aims of efficiently ensuring…

$231k
Granted FY2025still arriving
31
Grants FY2025still arriving
31
States reached
$8k
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, FY2024 to 2025.

Education$257kPublic Benefit$74kRecreation & Sports$38kMembership Benefit$23kCivil Rights$15k
02FY2025 · 31 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 31 grants below total $223,104, the rows itemized in this filing. The $230,813 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $7,709 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.
$7,500
Median grant
31
States reached
$18M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WV Higher Edu Policy Comm$7,500
NH Dept of Education$7,500
Maine Dept of Education$7,500
Iowa College Aid$7,500
GA Nonpublic Postsec Edu Comm$7,500
SD Board of Regents$7,500
OR - HECC$7,500
OK State Rgnts for Higher Edu$7,500
State of Michigan$7,500
Commonwealth of MA DHE$7,500
TX Higher Edu Coord Board$7,500
MO - Dept of HEWD$7,500
ND Uni System Office$7,500
The South Comm on Higher Edu$7,500
Board of Postsec Institutions$7,500
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 (FY24–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 58% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%DE - Dept of Edu: $8k → 11%Commonwealth of MA DHE: $8k → 16%MN Office of Higher Edu: $8k → 14%TX Higher Edu Coord Board: $8k → 10%OK State Rgnts for Higher Edu: $8k → 16%The South Comm on Higher Edu: $8k → 16%Iowa College Aid: $8k → 10%AL Commission on Higher Edu: $8k → 18%MO - Dept of HEWD: $8k → 10%OR - HECC: $8k → 14%CT Office of Higher Edu: $8k → 11%NC SEAA UNC System Office: $8k → 8%GA Nonpublic Postsec Edu Comm: $8k → 14%CO Dept of Higher Edu: $8k → 12%Indiana Comm for Higher Edu: $8k → 16%WV Higher Edu Policy Comm: $8k → 18%IL Board of Higher Edu: $8k → 11%MS Ins of Higher Learning: $8k → 23%NJ- OSHE: $8k → 11%ND Uni System Office: $8k → 10%SCHEV - Council of Higher Edu: $8k → 22%SD Board of Regents: $8k → 10%MD Higher Edu Commission: $8k → 19%NH Dept of Education: $8k → 7%KY Council on Postsec Edu: $8k → 14%DE - Dept of Edu: $6k → 11%MN Office of Higher Edu: $8k → 14%OK State Rgnts for Higher Edu: $8k → 16%Iowa College Aid: $8k → 10%AL Commission on Higher Edu: $6k → 18%OR - HECC: $8k → 14%CT Office of Higher Edu: $8k → 11%GA Nonpublic Postsec Edu Comm: $8k → 14%CO Dept of Higher Edu: $8k → 12%WV Higher Edu Policy Comm: $8k → 18%MS Ins of Higher Learning: $6k → 23%NJ- OSHE: $8k → 11%ND Uni System Office: $8k → 10%MD Higher Edu Commission: $8k → 19%NH Dept of Education: $8k → 7%KY Council on Postsec Edu: $7k → 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

AK
ME
NH
MT
ND
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
SD
IA
IN
NJ
CT
CO
MO
KY
WV
VA
MD
DE
TN
NC
SC
OK
MS
AL
GA
TX
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.

82%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$331k · 23 repeat orgs$75k to everyone else

23 repeat relationships: 23 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

23
2

Total granted

$331k
$15k

Still filing today

4%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $60k went to new ones.

50%100%’24’25
RenewedFirst-time
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

  • ID
    Iowa Department of Education
    2× · 2024–2025 · $15k
  • SO
    State of New Hampshire
    2× · 2024–2025 · $15k
  • HE
    Higher Education Coordinating Commission - Office of Workforce Investments
    2× · 2024–2025 · $15k

Funded once

  • IB
    Illinois Board of Higher Education
    one grant, 2024 · $8k
  • DO
    DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
    one grant, 2024 · $8k
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
04the grantee network

1 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. 1 of the 33 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
1/1
Grantees still filing
1/1
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Iowa Department of Education: $15,000 · OtherState of New Hampshire: $15,000 · OtherHigher Education Coordinating Commission - Office of Workforce Investments: $15,000 · OtherNORTH DAKOTA UNIVERSITY SYSTEM: $15,000 · OtherMICHIGAN DEP OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES: $15,000 · OtherCOLORADO ENERGY OFFICE: $15,000 · OtherWisconsin Higher Education Aids Board: $15,000 · OtherOKLAHOMA COLLEGE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: $15,000 · OtherSTATE OF TENNESSEE: $15,000 · OtherMINNESOTA ZOO: $15,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK: $15,000 · OtherSTATE OF CONNECTICUT: $15,000 · OtherGA Nonpublic Postsec Edu Comm: $15,000 · OtherWV Higher Edu Policy Comm: $15,000 · OtherNJ Dept of Environmental Protection: $15,000 · OtherState of Maine: $15,000 · OtherTHE UNIVERSITY OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS: $15,000 · OtherCOMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY: $14,418 · Other+15 more: $137,076 · Other+15 more
Other$406,494

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

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their 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 THE UNIVERSITY OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS ↗

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.

Investor Protection T…Council of State and …Association of State …Educational Credit Ma…National Fish and Wil…National Assembly of …The Conservation Fund…American Bar Associat…The Nature ConservancyAssociation of Public…National Skills Coali…Rockefeller Philanthr…
Investor Protection TrustDC28.4× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Investor Protection Trust · Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists Inc · Association of State and Territorial Health Officials · Educational Credit Management Corporation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · National Assembly of State Arts Agencies Inc · The Conservation Fund a Nonprofit Corporation · American Bar Association · The Nature Conservancy · Association of Public Health Laboratories Inc · National Skills Coalition · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc

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 National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    typical government reliance, FY20–23
    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 33 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 National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements’ 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