Skip to content
Norwich University at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Norwich University

Norwich's mission is to give our youth an education that shall be American in its character.

$80M
Granted FY2025still arriving
18
Grants FY2025still arriving
12
States reached
$2.7M
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 2025.

Education$20MInternational$5.1MScience & Tech$3.6MPublic Safety & Disaster$1.5MEmployment$854kPhilanthropy$549kPublic Benefit$470kHealth$426k
02FY2025 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 18 grants below total $15,302,816, the rows itemized in this filing. The $80,454,336 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $65,151,520 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

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $19k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $813k
  • $250k+10 grants · $14M
$356,251
Median grant
12
States reached
$526M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Virginia Tech Foundation Inc$2,723,068
The Citadel$2,466,800
Texas A&M University$2,271,635
University of North Georgia$2,054,058
VMI Research Laboratories Inc$1,628,205
NUARI - NU Applied Research Institute$1,518,947
University of Mississippi$688,686
Town of Northfield$470,000
OCHIN Inc$356,251
SecurEd Inc$285,865
University of North Texas$207,542
Montreat College$142,734
Purdue University$141,317
University of Texas Health Sciences$126,819
University Enterprises Corporation$114,662
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 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 75% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%SecurEd Inc: $286k → 7%UNIVERSITY ENTERPRISES CORPORATION: $174k → 12%UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS: $341k → 8%University of Texas Health Sciences: $127k → 16%Texas A&M University: $2.3M → 22%The Citadel: $2.5M → 12%OCHIN Inc: $356k → 12%MONTREAT COLLEGE: $195k → 12%FORSYTH TECHNICAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE: $14k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF NORTH GEORGIA: $2.1M → 12%PURDUE UNIVERSITY: $224k → 19%UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON: $59k → 9%University of Mississippi: $689k → 18%IQ4 CORPORATION: $38k → 7%STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $174k → 14%VMI RESEARCH LABORATORIES INC: $1.8M → 12%VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE: $4.5M → 21%NORWICH UNIVERSITY APPLIED RESEARCH INSTITUTES: $3.6M → 9%SECURED INC: $166k → 7%University Enterprises Corporation: $115k → 12%University of North Texas: $208k → 8%TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $1.8M → 22%THE CITADEL: $906k → 12%OCHIN INC: $70k → 12%Montreat College: $143k → 12%Forsyth Technical Community College: $7k → 15%University of North Georgia: $2.1M → 12%Purdue University: $141k → 19%University of Washington: $19k → 9%Stevens Institute of Technology: $80k → 14%VMI Research Laboratories Inc: $1.6M → 12%Virginia Tech Foundation Inc: $2.7M → 21%NUARI - NU Applied Research Institute: $1.5M → 9%Town of Northfield: $470k → 9%VILLAGE OF NORTHFIELD: $234k → 9%VILLAGE OF NORTHFIELD: $234k → 9%VILLAGE OF NORTHFIELD: $225k → 9%VILLAGE OF NORTHFIELD: $216k → 9%VILLAGE OF NORTHFIELD: $208k → 9%VILLAGE OF NORTHFIELD: $200k → 9%VILLAGE OF NORTHFIELD: $78k → 9%VILLAGE OF NORTHFIELD: $76k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

VT
WA
OR
IN
NJ
CA
VA
NC
SC
MS
GA
TX
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$25M · 15 repeat orgs$853k to everyone else

15 repeat relationships: 15 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
1

Total granted

$25M
$38k

Still filing today

93%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $816k 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
EducationInternationalPhilanthropyHealthOther
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

  • TA
    Texas A&M Foundation
    2× · 2024–2025 · $4.1M · revenue +28%
  • UE
    UNIVERSITY ENTERPRISES CORPORATION AT CSUSB
    2× · 2024–2025 · $289k · revenue +4%
  • TT
    THE TRUSTEES OF THE STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
    2× · 2024–2025 · $254k · revenue +8%

Funded once

  • IC
    IQ4 CORPORATION
    one grant, 2024 · $38k
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
University of Virginia Investment Management Company

The university of virginia investment management company (uvimco) is organized to invest funds on behalf of the rector and visitors of the university of virginia (the university or uva) and university-associated organizations (uaos).

Education
2
Dunwoody College of Technology

Dunwoody college changes lives by building opportunities for graduates to have successful careers, to develop into leaders and entrepreneurs, and to engage in "the better performance of life's duties." quote is from the last will and…

Education
3
The University of TexasTexas a&M Investment Management Company

To generate superior long-term investment returns to support The University of Texas and Texas A&M University systems as they provide world-class teaching, push the boundaries of discovery, and achieve excellence in patient healthcare for…

Education
4
Furman University

The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.

Education
5
University of Virginia Foundation

To provide administrative services to university of virginia (university) entities, university associated organizations, or other entities involved in activities which support the university. to engage in matters pertaining to real…

Education
6
Virginia Tech Foundation Inc

Virginia tech foundation, inc. (vtf) is a virginia nonstock corporation established in 1948 for the sole purpose of managing virginia tech's endowment to advance virginia tech's mission and its strategic priorities.

Education
7
The University of North Carolina At Greensboro Investment Fund Inc

To accept the transfer of assets from the uncg endowment fund and the affiliated foundations, which benefit the university, and to manage the investment of those assets.

Education
8
Vanderbilt University

See Disclosure Above.

Education
9
The Northern Michigan University Foundation

The nmu foundation will establish and foster relationships to generate resources that benefit the strategic goals of northern michigan university.

Education
10
Trinity College

To expand on the mission statement made on page 1, trinity's core mission values and characteristics emphasize: 1)commitment to the education of women in a particular way through the design and pedagogy of the historic undergraduate…

Education
11
Trinity University

Trinity university is an independent co-educational university whose mission is excellence in the interrelated areas of teaching, research and services.

Education
12
Wentworth Institute of Technology Inc

Wentworth institute of technology is a nationally recognized private coeducational and residential university of higher education with a mission to empower, inspire and innovate through experiential learning with a core purpose of career…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Texas a&M Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Pike County 4-H Council Incorporated. 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 19 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
5/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VIRGINIA TECH FOUNDATION INC: $7,250,015 · EducationVIRGINIA TECH FOUNDATION INCUNIVERSITY OF NORTH GEORGIA FOUNDATION INC: $4,137,227 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF NORTH GEORGIA FOUNDATION INCTexas A&M Foundation: $4,061,558 · EducationTexas A&M FoundationTHE CITADEL FOUNDATION: $3,372,357 · EducationTHE CITADEL FOUNDATION+6 more: $1,431,186 · Education+6 moreVMI RESEARCH LABORATORIES: $3,449,953 · OtherVMI RESEARCH LABORATOR…Town of Northfield: $1,941,825 · OtherTown of NorthfieldUNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI: $688,686 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MISSISSI…PIKE COUNTY 4-H COUNCIL INCORPORATED: $365,099 · OtherPIKE COUNTY 4-H COUNCI…+2 more: $164,419 · OtherNORWICH UNIVERSITY APPLIED RESEARCH INSTITUTES LTD: $5,113,463 · InternationalNORWICH UNIVERSIT…UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS FOUNDATION INC: $548,796 · PhilanthropyOCHIN INC: $425,881 · Health
Education$20,252,343Other$6,609,982International$5,113,463Philanthropy$548,796Health$425,881

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 budgetVIRGINIA TECH FOUNDATION INC: $7,250,015 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetNORWICH UNIVERSITY APPLIED RESEARCH INSTITUTES LTD: $5,113,463 over 2y, 38% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF NORTH GEORGIA FOUNDATION INC: $4,137,227 over 2y, 19% of budgetTexas A&M Foundation: $4,061,558 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetVMI RESEARCH LABORATORIES: $3,449,953 over 2y, 76% of budgetTHE CITADEL FOUNDATION: $3,372,357 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS FOUNDATION INC: $548,796 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetSecurEd Inc: $451,459 over 2y, 32% of budgetOCHIN INC: $425,881 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPIKE COUNTY 4-H COUNCIL INCORPORATED: $365,099 over 2y, 83% of budgetMONTREAT COLLEGE: $337,522 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetUNIVERSITY ENTERPRISES CORPORATION AT CSUSB: $288,867 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF THE STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $253,728 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $77,905 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFORSYTH TECHNICAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC: $21,705 over 2y, 0.8% 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.

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 …
American Online Giving Foundation IncDE5.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover 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

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 Norwich University funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Norwich University. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 12%
  • Norwich University Applied Research Institutes Ltd: 64% of income from government
  • The Trustees of the Stevens Institute of Technology: 12% of income from government
  • Ochin Inc: 4% of 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)
1rely 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 19 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 Norwich University’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