Skip to content
Nc Charitable Trust Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Nc Charitable Trust Inc

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.

$4k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$3k
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, FY2017 to 2024.

Human Services$18kHealth$9kEducation$5kAnimals$2kRecreation & Sports$2kInternational$680Youth Development$55Philanthropy$25
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$340
Median grant
1
States reached
$960k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION$3,055
CHILDREN'S HOPE INDIA$340
Fred's Team (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center)$107
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 (FY18–23, $18k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%SOUTH ASIAN COUNCIL SOCIAL SERVICE: $10k → 13%SOUTH ASIAN COUNCIL FOR SOCIAL SERVICES (SACSS): $5k → 13%SOUTH ASIAN COUNCIL FOR SOCIAL SERVICES: $3k → 13%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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$31k · 5 repeat orgs$5k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +112% since the first grant, against +52% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
9

Total granted

$31k
$4k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+112%
+52%

Still filing today

60%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $447 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthHuman ServicesEducationInternationalRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • SA
    SOUTH ASIAN COUNCIL FOR SOCIAL SERVICES INC
    3× · 2018–2023 · $18k · revenue +261%
  • TC
    THE CHARLIE LANDERS FOUNDATION
    2× · 2022–2023 · $6k · revenue +4%
  • STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION
    4× · 2021–2024 · $5k · revenue +112%

Funded once

  • NY
    NEW YORK ROAD RUNNERS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $2k · revenue +52%
  • NP
    NCAIP PEOPLE'S MEDICAL CARE INC
    one grant, 2018 · $1k
  • NM
    NCIAP MEDICAL CARE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $500 · revenue +70%
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
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.

Health
2
Blood Cancer United Inc

Our mission is to cure leukemia, lymphoma, hodgkin's disease and myeloma, and improve the quality of life of patients and their families.

Health
3
New York Blood Center Inc

As one of the most preeminent and comprehensive blood centers in theworld, nybc operates under a four-part mission. for more information,see sch. o and part iii, 4a-c.

Health
4
New York Genome Center Inc

Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.

Health
5
Cancer Research Institute Inc

See schedule ocri is a nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing cancer immunotherapy through scientific discovery and global collaboration. since 1953, cri has funded research that deepens understanding of the immune system and its…

Health
6
The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Fdn Group

Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.

—
7
Samuel Waxman Cancer Research Foundation

The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…

—
8
Solving Kids' Cancer Inc

Skc impacts children through the initiation of clinical research trials of investigative treatment strategies. our vision is to continue expanding the armamentarium of effective and less toxic treartment strategies for pediatric…

Health
9
Jaeb Center for Health Research Foundation Inc

Our mission is to expand scientific knowledge and improve public health by designing and conducting world-class clinical trials and epidemiologic research.

Unclassified
10
The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Inc

Susan g. komen has an unmatched, comprehensive 360-degree approach to fighting breast cancer across all fronts and supporting millions of people in the u.s. and in countries worldwide. we advocate for policies to protect patients, drive…

Health
11
Commonwealth Cancer Consortium Inc

Break through cancer is a foundation dedicated to supporting translational research in the most difficult to treat cancers. our partner organizations are among the top cancer research centers and together, represent some of the most…

—
12
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc

The mission of dfci is to provide expert, compassionate, and equitable care to children, adults, and their families, while advancing the understanding, diagnosis, treatment, cure, and prevention of cancer and related diseases. we train new…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New York Road Runners Inc; the most unlike its peers is Children's Hope India Llc. 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

9 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. 9 of the 16 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SOUTH ASIAN COUNCIL FOR SOCIAL SERVICES INC: $17,500 · Human ServicesSOUTH ASIAN COUNCIL FOR SOCIAL SERVICES INCTHE CHARLIE LANDERS FOUNDATION: $6,064 · HealthTHE CHARLIE LANDERS F…NCIAP MEDICAL CARE INC: $500 · HealthNCIAP MEDICAL CARE IN…BREAKTHROUGH T1D: $280 · Health+1 more: $107 · HealthPINK ZEBRA FOUNDATION: $2,009 · OtherPINK ZEBRA FOUNDAT…NEW YORK ROAD RUNNERS INC: $1,768 · OtherNEW YORK ROAD RUNN…NCAIP PEOPLE'S MEDICAL CARE INC: $1,000 · OtherNCAIP PEOPLE'S MED…MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTRING KIDS CANCER: $700 · OtherMEMORIAL SLOAN KET…Global Connection 4 Women: $340 · OtherGlobal Connection …+3 more: $133 · OtherSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $4,965 · EducationSTEPHEN SILLER …CHILDREN'S HOPE INDIA LLC: $340 · InternationalBike New York Inc: $114 · Recreation & Sports
Human Services$17,500Health$6,951Other$5,950Education$4,965International$340Recreation & Sports$114

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 budgetSOUTH ASIAN COUNCIL FOR SOCIAL SERVICES INC: $17,500 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTHE CHARLIE LANDERS FOUNDATION: $6,064 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $4,965 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetNEW YORK ROAD RUNNERS INC: $1,768 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNCIAP MEDICAL CARE INC: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCHILDREN'S HOPE INDIA LLC: $340 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBREAKTHROUGH T1D: $280 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBike New York Inc: $114 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER: $107 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.

American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
American Online Giving Foundation IncDE7.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Nc Charitable Trust Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Nc Charitable Trust Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 16 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Nc’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