Skip to content

· Public charity

President and Fellows of Middlebury College

Through a commitment to immersive learning, we prepare students to lead engaged, consequential, and creative lives, contribute to their communities, and address the world's most challenging problems.

$97M
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$870k
Largest
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.

Public Benefit$5.7MScience & Tech$2.2MArts & Culture$408kHealth$342kHuman Services$125kEducation$112kCommunity Improvement$29k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 10 grants below total $1,954,807, the rows itemized in this filing. The $97,112,254 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $95,157,447 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

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $105k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $420k
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.4M
$90,953
Median grant
8
States reached
$2.4B
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Town of Middlebury$870,158
SUNY Research Foundation$559,394
Oregon Health & Science University$132,986
Shepherd Higher Education Consortium on Poverty$125,000
University System of New Hampshire$90,953
Town Hall Theater$71,349
University Of Vermont$41,327
Georgia Tech Research Corporation$23,684
The Ohio State University$21,675
Regents of the University of California$18,281
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–25, $154k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 81% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Shepherd Higher Education Consortium on Poverty: $125k → 12%Addison County Transit Resources: $29k → 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

ME
VT
NH
WA
WI
NY
MA
OR
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CA
VA
DE
AZ
GA
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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$8.4M · 14 repeat orgs$551k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
6

Total granted

$8.4M
$381k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-1%
+156%

Still filing today

21%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $170k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesEducationPublic BenefitOther
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

  • TO
    Town of Middlebury
    7× · 2017–2025 · $5.7M
  • TR
    The Research Foundation for The State University of New York
    3× · 2017–2025 · $599k · revenue +62%
  • IG
    ITHRIVE GAMES FOUNDATION
    3× · 2022–2024 · $308k · revenue -76% · 27% of their budget

Funded once

  • GT
    GEORGIA TECH APPLIED RESEARCH CORPORATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $127k · revenue +156%
  • PT
    Potomac Theatre Project Inc
    one grant, 2017 · $106k · revenue -100% · 44% of their budget
  • NB
    NU Borders LLC
    one grant, 2017 · $90k
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
Technology Policy Institute
International
2
Ipti Research Org for Tech and Inno Technology and Innovation Inc
—
3
Georgia Advanced Technology Ventures Inc

The corporation is organized and shall be operated exclusively as a supporting organization to and for the benefit of the georgia institute of technology to foster and support education and scientific research and economic development…

Education
4
Georgia Tech Global Inc

To engage in charitable, scientific, literary, and educational purposes and to receive, hold, invest, and administer property and to make expenditures to or for the benefit of georgia institute of technology (git) and to support its…

Education
5
Transportation Research Center Inc

To help our clients solve problems and address critical challenges to safely, effectively, and efficiently move goods and people throughout the world by applying the most advanced, leading-edge expertise, by a team of passionate and…

Public Benefit
6
Rit Global Delivery Corporation

Provide administrative and other support services to academic programs sponsored by rochester institute of technology both in the united states and abroad.

Education
7
Institute for Global Therapeutics and Drug Design
—
8
Georgia Tech Athletic Association Inc

The primary purpose of the association is to promote the educational programs of georgia tech through student body participation in "healthful exercises, recreations, athletic games and contests". the association "develops the young people…

Education
9
Virginia Tech Intellectual Properties Inc

To promote, encourage, and market scientific research by the faculty, staff and students solely for the benefit of virginia polytechnic institute and state university (virginia tech).

—
10
Georgia Tech Foundation Inc

It is the mission of the georgia tech foundation, inc., to: 1. promote the cause of higher education in the state of georgia; 2. receive and manage financial donations received by the foundation for support and enhancement of the georgia…

Education
11
Research Triangle Institute

Research Triangle Institute is one of the world's leading research institutes, dedicated to improving the human condition by turning knowledge into practice. Our staff of more than 3,700 provides research and technical (continued on…

Science & Tech
12
Augusta University Research Institute Inc

Augusta university research institute, inc. (the "institute") was incorporated under the laws of the state of georgia as a nonprofit corporation on july 31, 1980. the institute qualified as a tax-exempt corporation under section 501(c)(3)…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Georgia Tech Research Corporation; the most unlike its peers is Ithrive Games Foundation. 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

9 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. 9 of the 23 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Town of Middlebury: $5,746,231 · OtherTown of MiddleburyITHRIVE GAMES FOUNDATION: $307,576 · OtherTown Hall Theater: $302,328 · OtherUNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF NEW HAMPSHIRE: $294,941 · Other+13 more: $1,231,431 · Other+13 moreThe Research Foundation for The State University of New York: $598,773 · EducationSHEPHERD HIGHER EDUCATION CONSORTIUM ON POVERTY INC: $125,000 · Human ServicesTRI-VALLEY TRANSIT INC: $29,360 · Human ServicesGEORGIA TECH APPLIED RESEARCH CORPORATION: $127,345 · HealthGEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION: $23,684 · HealthTake This Inc: $132,105 · Public Benefit
Other$7,882,507Education$598,773Human Services$154,360Health$151,029Public Benefit$132,105

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 budgetThe Research Foundation for The State University of New York: $598,773 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetITHRIVE GAMES FOUNDATION: $307,576 over 3y, 27% of budgetTake This Inc: $132,105 over 2y, 10% of budgetGEORGIA TECH APPLIED RESEARCH CORPORATION: $127,345 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPotomac Theatre Project Inc: $105,658 over 1y, 44% of budgetTRI-VALLEY TRANSIT INC: $29,360 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetGEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION: $23,684 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPOINT PARK UNIVERSITY: $21,447 over 1y, 0.0% 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 Research Foundation for The State University of New York ↗
  • Who funds ITHRIVE GAMES FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Take This Inc ↗
  • Who funds GEORGIA TECH APPLIED RESEARCH CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds SHEPHERD HIGHER EDUCATION CONSORTIUM ON POVERTY INC ↗
  • Who funds Potomac Theatre Project Inc ↗
  • Who funds TRI-VALLEY TRANSIT INC ↗
  • Who funds GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds POINT PARK UNIVERSITY ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization President and Fellows of Middlebury College funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from President and Fellows of Middlebury College. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 81%
  • Tri-Valley Transit Inc: 81% 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)
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 23 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 President and Fellows of Middlebury College’s filings →

More from the funding graph