Skip to content

· Public charity

North Carolina Coastal Land Trust

The organization's primary exempt purpose is acquiring and protecting lands of regional and national conservation and/or historic significance in the coastal plain of north carolina.

$3.0M
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$569k
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

88% of North Carolina Coastal Land Trust’s FY2025 grant dollars went to The Nature Conservancy, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 1 organization directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Organizations named directly on the return

1
’17
2
’18
2
’19
2
’20
3
’21
1
’22
1
’23
1
’24
1
’25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

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 2025.

Environment$4.1MAnimals$292kEducation$10k
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $647,796, the rows itemized in this filing. The $3,041,994 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $2,394,198 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.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $50k–250k1 grant · $79k
  • $250k+1 grant · $569k
$569,296
Median grant
1
States reached
$65M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$569,296
NC WILDLIFE RESOURCE COMMISSION$78,500
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 93% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $9k → 17%DUCKS UNLIMITED INC: $594k → 17%NC WILDLIFE RESOURCE COMMISSION: $204k → 8%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $690k → 11%UNIVERSITY OF NC - WILMINGTON: $10k → 12%NC COASTAL FEDERATION: $340k → 12%SLICK FAMILY FOUNDATION: $10k → 15%DUCKS UNLIMITED INC: $184k → 17%NC WILDLIFE RESOURCE COMMISSION: $79k → 8%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $569k → 11%TOWN OF CEDAR POINT: $250k → 12%DUCKS UNLIMITED INC: $112k → 17%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $495k → 11%DUCKS UNLIMITED INC: $66k → 17%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $325k → 11%DUCKS UNLIMITED INC: $17k → 17%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $100k → 11%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $80k → 11%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.

69%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.4M · 3 repeat orgs$664k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
6

Total granted

$1.4M
$664k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+153%
+389%

Still filing today

67%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentPhilanthropyOther
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

  • DU
    Ducks Unlimited Inc
    5× · 2020–2024 · $974k · revenue +105%
  • NW
    NC WILDLIFE RESOURCE COMMISSION
    2× · 2021–2025 · $283k
  • PD
    PEE DEE LAND TRUST
    2× · 2020–2021 · $191k · revenue +153%

Funded once

  • NC
    NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL FEDERATION INCgraduated
    3× · 2019–2025 · $340k · revenue +295%
  • TO
    TOWN OF CEDAR POINT
    one grant, 2019 · $250k
  • TO
    TOWN OF SHALLOTTE
    one grant, 2018 · $45k
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

5 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. 5 of the 10 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)
5/5
Grantees still filing
5/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $2,259,324 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYNORTH CAROLINA COASTAL FEDERATION INC: $340,000 · OtherNORTH CAROLINA COASTAL FEDERATION INCNC WILDLIFE RESOURCE COMMISSION: $282,850 · OtherNC WILDLIFE RESOURCE COMMISSIONTOWN OF CEDAR POINT: $250,000 · OtherTOWN OF CEDAR POINT+3 more: $64,285 · OtherDucks Unlimited Inc: $973,936 · EnvironmentDucks Unlimited IncPEE DEE LAND TRUST: $190,776 · EnvironmentPEE DEE LAND TRUSTSlick Family Foundation: $10,000 · Philanthropy
Other$3,196,459Environment$1,164,712Philanthropy$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $2,259,324 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetDucks Unlimited Inc: $973,936 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA COASTAL FEDERATION INC: $340,000 over 3y, 5.3% of budgetPEE DEE LAND TRUST: $190,776 over 2y, 23% of budgetSlick Family Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 2.8% 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 THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds Ducks Unlimited Inc ↗
  • Who funds NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL FEDERATION INC ↗
  • Who funds PEE DEE LAND TRUST ↗
  • Who funds Slick Family Foundation ↗

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.

National Fish and Wildlife FoundationDC13.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Foundation for the Carolinas

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 North Carolina Coastal Land Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from North Carolina Coastal Land Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%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
    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 10 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 North Carolina Coastal Land’s filings →

    More from the funding graph