Skip to content

· Private foundation

Norman and Nancy Norris Private Foundation

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.

$3k
Granted FY2022
12
Grants FY2022
4
States reached
$1k
Largest
01What it funds
0189% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2022.

Religion$12kHousing & Shelter$6kAnimals$4kEnvironment$4kPhilanthropy$3kHealth$1kPublic Safety & Disaster$900Arts & Culture$735Other$0
02FY2022 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$150
Median grant
4
States reached
$178k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SAINT PETERS PIKELAND UCC$1,000
FRENCH & PICKERING CREEK CONSERVATION TRUST$1,000
REAVIS HIGH SCHOOL$200
BRANDYWINE VALLEY SPCA$200
THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS$150
HUMANE SOCIETY$150
PENNSYLVANIA SPCA CENTRAL PA CENTER$150
MAIN LINE ANIMAL RESCUE$150
CENTER FOR THE ARTS$125
CAFE OF LIFE$100
LUDWIGS CORNER FIRE DEPARTMENT$100
KIMBERTON FIRE COMPANY$100
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 (FY17–21, $700) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 57% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%HOPE HOSPICE: $200 → 10%AVOW HOSPICE: $200 → 10%GOOD SAMARITAN SHELTER: $200 → 6%GOOD SAMARITAN SHELTER: $100 → 6%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

WA
IL
NY
PA
CA
CO
KS
DC
TX
FL
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.

80%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$41k · 16 repeat orgs$10k to everyone else

16 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2022, 9 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
15

Total granted

$41k
$9k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+70%
+79%

Still filing today

56%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22
AnimalsHuman ServicesHousing & ShelterEnvironmentArts & CulturePublic Safety & DisasterOther
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

  • BV
    BRANDYWINE VALLEY SPCA
    4× · 2017–2022 · $1k · revenue +142%
  • HW
    Humane World for Animals Inc
    4× · 2017–2022 · $750 · revenue +46%
  • TA
    THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS
    4× · 2017–2022 · $750 · revenue +80%

Funded once

  • JC
    JEFFERSON CENTER FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue -41%
  • NL
    NATURAL LANDS TRUST CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS
    one grant, 2017 · $1k
  • AC
    ASHER CENTER AT NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2021 · $500
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
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for Monterey County

The SPCA Monterey County's Mission is assuring compassionate treatment of all animals through rescue, rehabilitation, protection and education. The SPCA shelters homeless, neglected, and abused pets, including dogs, cats, horses, exotic…

Animals
2
Dorchester Paws

Dorchester Paws strives to instill humane principles into society through the prevention of cruelty to animals.

Animals
3
The San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

To ensure every companion animal has access to quality medical care, compassionate shelter, and a loving home.

Animals
4
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Tampa Bay Florida Inc

Spca tampa bay is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that operates pinellas county's only nonprofit for-all animal shelter assisting all animals in need, regardless of species or circumstance, at its 10-acre campus in largo. (continued on…

Animals
5
Humane Society of Southern Arizona

To compassionately serve pets and the people who love them.

Animals
6
Friends of the Palm SpringsAnimal Shelter

We are dedicated to building a community responsible for pet stewardship and humane treatment of animals.

Animals
7
Spca of Pittsylvania County Inc

The spca of pittsylvania county is committed to rescuing adoptable animals from impoundment and euthanasia, so they can be placed in proper homes. this is acheived primarily through vetting, fostering, and placing the animals in their…

Animals
8
Lawrence Humane Society

The lawrence humane society nurtures the human-animal bond by providing shelter, care and advocacy for homeless and abused animals, as well as resource for the pets and people in our community

Animals
9
Spring Farm Sanctuary
Animals
10
Charleston Animal Society

Since its founding, our mission has always stayed the same: the prevention of cruelty to animals. in 1874, charleston animal society became the first animal organization in south carolina and one of the first in the nation and has never…

Animals
11
Pet Animal Welfare Society of Connecticut Inc

Pet animal welfare society of ct (paws), established in 1962, is a no-kill animal rescue shelter dedicated to the rescue and adoption of our community's homeless and abused dogs and cats. paws efforts are focused on three critical needs:…

Animals
12
Kitsap Humane Society

Providing positive life changing solutions to people and animals in need.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals; the most unlike its peers is SeaVuria. 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

15 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. 15 of the 36 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
12/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $9,550 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $9,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientNAPLES UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST: $6,800 · OtherNAPLES UNITED CHURCH OF CHRISTJEFFERSON CENTER FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 · OtherJEFFERSON CENTER FOUNDATION INCIndividual grant recipient: $3,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientUNITED WAY OF LEE HENDRY AND GLADES: $1,600 · OtherUNITED WAY OF LEE HENRY AND GLADES: $1,500 · Other+16 more: $5,900 · Other+16 moreBRANDYWINE VALLEY SPCA: $1,000 · AnimalsHumane World for Animals Inc: $750 · AnimalsTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $750 · AnimalsPennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals: $600 · AnimalsFRENCH AND PICKERING CREEKS CONSERVATION TRUST INC: $3,000 · EnvironmentCAFE OF LIFE INC: $600 · Housing & ShelterGOOD SAMARITAN SHELTER: $200 · Housing & ShelterCENTER FOR THE ARTS OF BONITA SPRINGS INC: $735 · Arts & CultureGOOD SAMARITAN SERVICES: $300 · Human ServicesHOPE HOSPICE: $200 · Human ServicesAVOW Hospice Inc: $200 · Human ServicesSeaVuria: $300 · EducationKIMBERTON FIRE COMPANY: $100 · Public Safety & Disaster
Other$42,350Animals$3,100Environment$3,000Housing & Shelter$800Arts & Culture$735Human Services$700Education$300Public Safety & Disaster$100

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 budgetJEFFERSON CENTER FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetFRENCH AND PICKERING CREEKS CONSERVATION TRUST INC: $3,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMain Line Animal Rescue Inc: $1,150 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetBRANDYWINE VALLEY SPCA: $1,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHumane World for Animals Inc: $750 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $750 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER FOR THE ARTS OF BONITA SPRINGS INC: $735 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetPennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals: $600 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCAFE OF LIFE INC: $600 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetGOOD SAMARITAN SERVICES: $300 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGOOD SAMARITAN SHELTER: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHOPE HOSPICE: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAVOW Hospice Inc: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKIMBERTON FIRE COMPANY: $100 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.

  • Who funds JEFFERSON CENTER FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds FRENCH AND PICKERING CREEKS CONSERVATION TRUST INC ↗
  • Who funds Main Line Animal Rescue Inc ↗
  • Who funds BRANDYWINE VALLEY SPCA ↗
  • Who funds Humane World for Animals Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR THE ARTS OF BONITA SPRINGS INC ↗
  • Who funds Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals ↗
  • Who funds CAFE OF LIFE INC ↗
  • Who funds GOOD SAMARITAN SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds SeaVuria ↗
  • Who funds GOOD SAMARITAN SHELTER ↗
  • Who funds HOPE HOSPICE ↗
  • Who funds AVOW Hospice Inc ↗
  • Who funds KIMBERTON FIRE COMPANY ↗

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.

Vanguard Charitable Endowment ProgramPA10× affinity7 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Norman and Nancy Norris Private Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Norman and Nancy Norris Private Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Avow Hospice Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Norman and Nancy Norris Private Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Norman and Nancy Norris Private Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

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 36 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Norman and Nancy Norris Private’s filings →

More from the funding graph