· Public charity
National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States
The NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN THE UNITED STATES protects significant places representing our diverse cultural experiences by taking direct action and inspiring broad public support.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 62% of NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN THE UNITED STATES’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k21 grants · $162k
- $10k–50k88 grants · $1.3M
- $50k–250k78 grants · $8.5M
- $250k+22 grants · $12M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NT GREEN FUND INC | $1,700,000 |
| ST JAMES AME CHURCH | $1,413,451 |
| HISTORIC BROWN CHAPEL AME | $1,020,000 |
| ROBERTS TEMPLE CHURCH OF GOD IN CHRIST | $1,000,000 |
| MONTPELIER FDN | $551,588 |
| ANTIOCH BAPTIST CHURCH | $500,000 |
| FIRST CONG CHURCH OF MARION (UCC) | $500,000 |
| QUINN CHAPEL AME FREDERICK | $500,000 |
| MT CARMEL MISSIONARY BAPTIST | $500,000 |
| GLIDE FOUNDATION | $500,000 |
| NEW BETHEL BAPTIST CHURCH | $500,000 |
| ST ALPHONSUS LIGUORI | $499,999 |
| BOYNTON CHAPEL METHODIST | $475,000 |
| DICKERSON CHAPEL AME CHURCH | $400,000 |
| CLEVELAND RESTORATION SOC | $300,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $1.5M) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 90% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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 +33% since the first grant, against +3% for the ones you funded once.
196 repeat relationships — 54 still active in FY2025, 142 since wound down; 151 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, 36% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $14M 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
- AFASSOCIATION FOR THE PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC CONGRESSIONAL CEMETERY7× · 2017–2025 · $2.4M · revenue +73% · 34% of their budget
- MFMONTPELIER FOUNDATION8× · 2017–2025 · $1.3M · revenue +80%
- RBROCKEFELLER BROTHERS FUND INC3× · 2019–2023 · $812k · revenue +65%
Funded once
- HVHISTORIC VERNON A M E CHURCH INCone grant, 2021 · $400k
- IOINSTITUTE OF CHRIST THE KING SOVEREIGN PRIEST INCone grant, 2019 · $375k
- MCMOKUAIKAUA CHURCH CONGREGATIONALone grant, 2019 · $250k
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.
Historic preservation & community engagement
Tudor place historic house & garden preserves the stories of six generations of descendants of martha washington and the enslaved and free people who lived and worked at this georgetown landmark for nearly two centuries. by examining their…
Historical preservation
To promote and preserve the historal buildings in the jacksonville historal district
Preservation of histrical buildings
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Restore Oregon Inc and the most unlike its peers is Tr Uw R H Mosley Women's Ctr. 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 31 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 6% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% 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.
587 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. 587 of the 1,058 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 ASSOCIATION FOR THE PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC CONGRESSIONAL CEMETERY ↗
- Who funds NT GREEN FUND INC ↗
- Who funds MONTPELIER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ROCKEFELLER BROTHERS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Villa Finale Museum & Gardens ↗
- Who funds CLIVEDEN OF THE NATIONAL TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds The Palmetto Trust For Historic Preservation Inc ↗
- Who funds GLIDE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Alabama African American Civil Rights Heritage Sites Consortium ↗
- Who funds FILOLI CENTER ↗
- Who funds CLEVELAND RESTORATION SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE COLTRANE HOME IN DIX HILLS ↗
- Who funds PRESIDENT LINCOLN'S COTTAGE AT THE SOLDIERS HOME ↗
- Who funds OATLANDS INC ↗
- Who funds Tuskegee University ↗
- Who funds Museum of African American History Inc ↗
- Who funds BRUCEMORE INC ↗
- Who funds THE SOCIETY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WEEKSVILLE & BEDFORD-STUYVESANT ↗
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 loosely connected circle, clustered around a few shared anchors.
Open a dossier: 1772 Foundation Inc · The Andrew W Mellon Foundation · Tom Joyner Foundation Inc · National Park Foundation · United Negro College Fund Inc · New York Landmarks Conservancy Inc · Co Tua Marion S Covington Fdn · Cities for Financial Empowerment Fund Inc · New York Council for the Humanities · Urban Sustainability Directors Network · Historic Preservation Education Foundation · Greater Hudson Heritage Network
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 Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States 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.
- Upton Planning Committee Inc — 100% of income from government
- Museum of African American History Inc — 43% 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.