Skip to content
Northeast Wilderness Trust Corporation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Northeast Wilderness Trust Corporation

Northeast wilderness trust is a regional land trust working to preserve and restore forever-wild landscapes for nature and people in new york, vermont, new hampshire, maine, massachusetts and connecticut.

$831k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$235k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $21k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $810k
$160,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$64M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FRENCHMAN BAY CONSERVANCY$235,000
SHARON LAND TRUST$180,000
MIDCOAST CONSERVANCY$160,000
NORFOLK LAND TRUST$130,000
CORNWALL CONSERVATION TRUST$105,000
THOUSAND ISLAND LAND TRUST$21,250
02The need
02

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 (FY25–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 31% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%THOUSAND ISLAND LAND TRUST: $21k → 14%SHARON LAND TRUST: $180k → 9%MIDCOAST CONSERVANCY: $160k → 9%FRENCHMAN BAY CONSERVANCY: $235k → 11%NORFOLK LAND TRUST: $130k → 9%CORNWALL CONSERVATION TRUST: $105k → 9%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 field
03the grantee network

6 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
2/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Frenchman Bay Conservancy: $235,000 · EnvironmentFrenchman Bay ConservancySHARON LAND TRUST INC: $180,000 · EnvironmentSHARON LAND TRUST INCMidcoast Conservancy: $160,000 · EnvironmentMidcoast ConservancyNORFOLK LAND TRUST INC: $130,000 · EnvironmentNORFOLK LAND TRUST INC+1 more: $21,250 · EnvironmentCornwall Conservation Trust Inc: $105,000 · OtherCornwall Conse…
Environment$726,250Other$105,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFrenchman Bay Conservancy: $235,000 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetMidcoast Conservancy: $160,000 over 1y, 8.3% of budgetNORFOLK LAND TRUST INC: $130,000 over 1y, 90% 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.

The Nature ConservancyDonor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Nature ConservancyVA15.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Nature Conservancy · 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 Northeast Wilderness Trust Corporation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Northeast Wilderness Trust Corporation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 49%
  • Norfolk Land Trust Inc: 49% of income from government
  • Cornwall Conservation Trust Inc: 30% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
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 6 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 Northeast Wilderness’ 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