· Private foundation
Overhills 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k29 grants · $78k
- $10k–50k30 grants · $642k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $113k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Yale University School of Forestry | $62,500 |
| Christodora Inc | $50,000 |
| White Birch Community Center | $44,000 |
| Open Space Institute Inc | $33,000 |
| Adirondack Experience | $30,000 |
| The Wilderness Society | $25,000 |
| The Nature Conservancy Adirondack Chapter | $25,000 |
| The Nature Conservancy NC | $25,000 |
| Adirondack Foundation | $25,000 |
| Natural Resource Defense Council | $25,000 |
| Resources Legacy Fund | $25,000 |
| Adirondack Explorer | $25,000 |
| The Conservation Fund | $25,000 |
| Audubon Center of Greenwich | $20,000 |
| Northern Forest Center Inc | $20,000 |
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 (FY24–24, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 23%, 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +57% since the first grant, against +14% for the ones you funded once.
87 repeat relationships — 52 still active in FY2024, 35 since wound down; 8 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, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k 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
- WBWHITE BIRCH COMMUNITY CENTER INC8× · 2017–2024 · $318k · revenue +69%
- OSOPEN SPACE INSTITUTE INC8× · 2017–2024 · $244k · revenue +219%
- TWTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY8× · 2017–2024 · $213k · revenue +40%
Funded once
- AHADIRONDACK HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONone grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue -13%
- NFNature Forwardone grant, 2021 · $15k · revenue +14%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2017 · $10k
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.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
The natural areas conservancy champions urban natural areas in new york city and across the nation through innovative research, partnerships, and advocacy. we increase the health and resilience of urban forests and wetlands, catalyze…
Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.
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.
See schedule onylcv is a non-partisan policy making and political action organization that works to make environmental protection a top priority with elected officials, decision-makers and the voters by evaluating incumbent performance and…
The central new york land trust seeks to preserve and protect natural areas in order to provide our communities clean water, clean air, wildlife habitat, and a chance to connect with the land.
The wildlands trust works throughout southeastern massachusetts to conserve and permanently protect native habitats, farmland, and lands of high ecologic and scenic value that serve to keep our communities healthy and our residents…
To protect and restore the ecological health of forest park and marquam nature park, maintain and enhance their extensive trails networks, promote equitable access, and inspire diverse community appreciation and stewardship of these iconic…
The mission of the new canaan land trust is to foster a connection between the new canaan community and its natural resources through the conservation and sustainable stewardship of our open space.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Adk is the only non-profit organization in new york state dedicated to the conservation, preservation, and responsible recreational use of the new york state forest preserve and other parks, wild lands, and waters vital to our members and…
The conservancy preserves and revitalizes new york's architecture. by doing so, it contributes to new york's economy, tourism and quality of life.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New England Forestry Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Partners for Health 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 43 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
89 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 89 of the 138 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 WHITE BIRCH COMMUNITY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Christodora Inc ↗
- Who funds OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds ADIRONDACK EXPLORER INC ↗
- Who funds RESOURCES LEGACY FUND ↗
- Who funds Wildlife Conservation Society ↗
- Who funds NORTHERN FOREST ATLAS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds ADIRONDACK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE ADIRONDACK COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds LAND TRUST ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds Northern Forest Center Inc ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds NEW ENGLAND FORESTRY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SAVE THE SOUND ↗
- Who funds American Bird Conservancy ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds CARY INSTITUTE OF ECOSYSTEM STUDIES INC ↗
- Who funds ADIRONDACK LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM OF THE ADIRONDACKS ↗
- Who funds RARE ↗
- Who funds THE STONE TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds Vermont Law School ↗
- Who funds THE WINGS OF THE DAWN BIRD SANCTUARY INC ↗
- Who funds STORM KING ART CENTER ↗
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: Prospect Hill Foundation Inc · Ibm International Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Cloudsplitter Foundation · The Walbridge Fund · Adirondack Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · The Jm Kaplan Fund Inc · The New York Community Trust · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Open Space Institute Land Trust Inc · New Hampshire Charitable Foundation
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 Overhills Foundation 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- New England Forestry Foundation Inc — 88% of income from government
- City Seed Inc — 87% of income from government
- Kids in Crisis Inc — 49% of income from government
- Vermont Land Trust Inc — 42% of income from government
- Save the Sound — 37% of income from government
- Nature Forward — 32% of income from government
- Vermont Law School — 14% of income from government
- Native Plant Trust Inc — 3% of income from government
- Milton Academy — 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 Overhills Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Overhills 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.