· Private foundation
Norwottock Charitable Trust
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k50 grants · $39k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $28k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HIGH CONCEPT LABORATORIES | $18,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| MADISON COMMUNITY MONTESSORI | $5,000 |
| PRESIDENT & FELLOWS HARVARD COLLEGE | $5,000 |
| ALFRED NOBEL DUAL LANGUAGE SCHOOL | $4,000 |
| PEGGY NOTEBAERT MUSEUM | $2,500 |
| HARVARD COLLEGE FUND | $1,500 |
| ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO | $1,100 |
| ALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES | $1,000 |
| BETTER GOVERNMENT ASSOCN | $1,000 |
| GRANT PARK MUSIC FESTIVAL | $1,000 |
| LINCOLN PARK ZOO | $1,000 |
| CYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
| CHICAGO SHAKESPEARE THEATER | $500 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY20–24, $9k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
75 repeat relationships — 45 still active in FY2024, 30 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- HCHigh Concept Laboratories5× · 2020–2024 · $102k · revenue +46%
University of Chicago4× · 2020–2024 · $60k · revenue +52%- FMFIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY4× · 2020–2023 · $53k · revenue +112%
Funded once
THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INCone grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue -8%- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2020 · $10k
UNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue -11%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
See schedule onorc at the university of chicago conducts research and data science on critical societal issues to guide decision-making and the development of programs and public policy. our experts identify relationships and trends, and…
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…
The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
Help improve policy and decision making through research and analysis.
Cdp north america, inc. 's ("cdp-na") vision for the future is a thriving economy that works for people and planet in the long term. we focus investors and companies on taking urgent action to build a truly sustainable economy by measuring…
To investigate, research, write, publish, present conferences and teach with respect to global, regional, transboundary, and comparative environmental issues and to make the findings from such activities available to the general public; to…
A nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to enhancing international peace and security in the 21st century, thereby retaining its focus on nuclear weapons but expanding to include other present emerging security threats.
Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Shared Interest Inc and the most unlike its peers is Building Performance Institute Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 37 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 20% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
87 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 87 of the 120 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds High Concept Laboratories ↗
- Who funds University of Chicago ↗
- Who funds FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY ↗
- Who funds THE CHICAGO COUNCIL ON GLOBAL AFFAIRS ↗
- Who funds THE AMERICAN PROSPECT INC ↗
- Who funds THE NEWBERRY LIBRARY ↗
- Who funds BRUSHWOOD CENTER AT RYERSON WOODS ↗
- Who funds Chicago Symphony Orchestra ↗
- Who funds CERES INC ↗
- Who funds THE SYNERGOS INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds MAD SHAK DANCE COMPANY ↗
- Who funds UNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds TIDES CENTER ↗
- Who funds LINCOLN PARK CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Lyric Opera of Chicago ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO FOUNDATION FOR WOMEN ↗
- Who funds THE CHICAGO ACADEMY OF SCIENCES ↗
- Who funds Chicago Humanities Festival ↗
- Who funds THE ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds MADISON COMMUNITY MONTESSORI SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds READER INSTITUTE FOR COMMUNITY JOURNALISM INC ↗
- Who funds Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists ↗
- Who funds WOMENS GLOBAL EDUCATION PROJECT ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds GREATER YELLOWSTONE COALITION ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds METROPOLITAN MAYORS CAUCUS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds JANE'S ROOM ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND POLICY CENTER OF THE MIDWEST ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Gaylord and Dorothy Donnelley Foundation · The Joyce Foundation · Polk Bros Foundation Inc · Arie and Ida Crown Memorial · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Walder Foundation · New Venture Fund · The Kresge Foundation · The Donnelley Foundation · Spectemur Agendo Inc
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Norwottock Charitable Trust funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Women's Lunch Place Inc — 8% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- American Academy of Arts & Sciences — 3% of income from government
- Ceres Inc — 0% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Norwottock Charitable Trust?
Find your warmest path to Norwottock Charitable Trust 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.