· Public charity
National Park Trust Inc
To preserve parks today and create park stewards for tomorrow.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 8 grants below total $206,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $543,690 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $337,690 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k2 grants · $14k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $137k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $55k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| TRAGEDY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FOR SURVIVORS (TAPS) | $55,000 |
| PROJECT HEALING WATERS FLY FISHING INC | $45,500 |
| OUR MILITARY KIDS | $40,000 |
| ARMED SERVICES ARTS PARTNERSHIP | $20,000 |
| THE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC | $19,000 |
| GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAINS INSTITUTE INC | $12,500 |
| ACCOKEEK FOUNDATION | $8,000 |
| HCST EXPLORE MIDDLE SCHOOL | $6,000 |
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 48% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +36% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.
20 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 13 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, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k 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
THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND2× · 2018–2019 · $533k · revenue +119%- BSBLUE STAR FAMILIES INC4× · 2019–2022 · $422k · revenue +397%
- OMOUR MILITARY KIDS INC4× · 2022–2025 · $170k · revenue +36%
Funded once
- TWTHE WILDERNESS LAND TRUSTgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $150k · revenue +77%
- RRRECREATE RESPONSIBILITY COALITION CO EMBRACING THE BEAR LLCone grant, 2022 · $62k
- LPLOWELL PARKS & CONSERVATION TRUSTone grant, 2023 · $46k · revenue -17%
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 Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust leads and inspires action to conserve and enhance the landscape of the Mountains to Sound Greenway, ensuring a long-term balance between people and nature.
The rocky mountain conservancy promotes stewardship of rocky mountain national park and similar lands through education and philanthropy.
The glacier national park conservancy works to preserve and protect glacier national park for future generations.
Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.
Our mission is to connect, strengthen and amplify a vibrant network of partners united to preserve, enhance and promote national historic & scenic trails.
As california state parks' statutory non-profit partner, we have a clear mission - to help strengthen parks and inspire all people to experience these extraordinary places.
Grounded in science and driven by education and stewardship, leave no trace empowers people to protect the outdoor places we share, ensuring a sustainable future for the environment and our collective outdoor experiences.
Conservation legacy engages future leaders who protect, restore, and enhance our nation's lands through community-based service.in 2024, conservation legacy engaged 2,524 participants who completed over 1.5 million service hours on public…
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
At Yosemite Rivers Alliance, we unite conservation and community to protect and restore the three rivers that ?ow through the Yosemite Regionthe Tuolumne, Stanislaus, and Merced.
Washington trails association is on a mission to connect everyone to the outdoors and build a community that gives back to trails and public lands.
The pacific crest trail association's mission is to advocate for the pacific crest trail as an inspirational outdoor experience, to connect people to the pct, and to conserve the trail.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Naturebridge and the most unlike its peers is Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 29 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
54 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. 54 of the 61 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 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND ↗
- Who funds BLUE STAR FAMILIES INC ↗
- Who funds OUR MILITARY KIDS INC ↗
- Who funds THE WILDERNESS LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds TRAGEDY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FOR SURVIVORS INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT HEALING WATERS FLY FISHING INC ↗
- Who funds MISSISSIPPI PARK CONNECTION ↗
- Who funds Point Reyes National Seashore Association ↗
- Who funds Appalachian Mountain Club ↗
- Who funds LOWELL PARKS & CONSERVATION TRUST ↗
- Who funds NATUREBRIDGE ↗
- Who funds ICE AGE TRAIL ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds ZION NATURAL HISTORY ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds THE BUS FOR OUTDOOR ACCESS AND TEACHING ↗
- Who funds ACCOKEEK FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds AKAKA FOUNDATION FOR TROPICAL FORESTS ↗
- Who funds Rock Creek Conservancy Inc ↗
- Who funds THE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds GREAT BASIN NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GLEN CANYON OUTDOOR ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY INITIATIVES ↗
- Who funds REDWOOD PARKS CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds ROSIE THE RIVETER TRUST ↗
- Who funds HALEAKALA CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds STROUD WATER RESEARCH CENTER ↗
- Who funds APPALACHIAN TRAIL CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN YOUTH CORPS ↗
- Who funds CHATTAHOOCHEE NATIONAL PARK CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE EASTERN CALIFORNIA MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds CHATTAHOOCHEE NATURE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Teaching Responsible Earth Education TREE ↗
- Who funds TIMUCUAN PARKS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SPARK SF PUBLIC SCHOOLS ↗
- Who funds Santa Monica Mountains Fund ↗
- Who funds GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAINS INSTITUTE 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: National Park Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Community Initiatives · Patagoniaorg · Partnership for the National Trails System Inc · National Environmental Education and Training Foundation Inc · The Outdoor Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Rei Cooperative Action Fund · American Trails · The San Francisco Foundation · Ibm International Foundation
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 National Park Trust Inc 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Rock Creek Conservancy Inc — 60% of income from government
- Project Healing Waters Fly Fishing Inc — 46% of income from government
- Accokeek Foundation Inc — 44% of income from government
- American Hiking Society — 14% of income from government
- Living Classrooms Foundation — 7% of income from government
- Appalachian Mountain Club — 1% 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.