Skip to content
Shenandoah National Park Trust at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Shenandoah National Park Trust

The SHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK TRUST provides strategic investments in programs and initiatives that help protect, enhance, and preserve the resources of shenandoah national park for all to enjoy, for this and future generations.

$1.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$305k
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.

Recreation & Sports$2.5MYouth Development$1.2MEnvironment$1.1MEducation$39kArts & Culture$29kAnimals$8kCommunity Improvement$5k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $526,632, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,453,655 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $927,023 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 · $5k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $34k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $182k
  • $250k+1 grant · $305k
$13,096
Median grant
4
States reached
$6.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK$304,926
CONSERVATION LEGACY$182,250
VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY$13,096
AMERICAN CONSERVATION EXPERIENCE$11,066
SOUL TRAK OUTDOORS$10,000
POTOMAC APPALACHIAN TRAIL CLUB$5,294
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 (FY24–25, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%SOUL TRAK OUTDOORS: $10k → 14%SOUL TRAK OUTDOORS: $10k → 14%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
MN
NY
CO
WV
VA
AZ
DC
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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.6M · 9 repeat orgs$224k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +118% since the first grant, against +4% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
13

Total granted

$4.6M
$213k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+118%
+4%

Still filing today

78%
54%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $11k 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
EnvironmentArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementRecreation & SportsYouth DevelopmentEducationOther
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

  • CONSERVATION LEGACY
    8× · 2018–2025 · $1.2M · revenue +124%
  • SN
    SHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK TRUST
    4× · 2017–2020 · $223k · revenue +113%
  • TP
    THE PIEDMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL
    3× · 2017–2019 · $106k · revenue +161%

Funded once

  • BR
    BLUE RIDGE PRISM INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $61k · revenue +198%
  • Cornell University
    one grant, 2022 · $30k · revenue +15%
  • DS
    DEMOLITION SERVICES INC
    one grant, 2022 · $20k
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
Property and Environment Research Center

Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.

Public Benefit
2
Capital Region Land Conservancy Inc

To conserve and protect the natural and historic land and water resources of virginia's capital region for the benefit of current and future generations.

Environment
3
New River Land Trust

To conserve the rural, natural, and cultural heritage of the new river region, protecting farms, forests, open spaces, and historic places.

Environment
4
Vermont Trails & Greenways Council

To promote trails and greenways and to ensure that people will always have access to the landscape of vermont.

Environment
5
The Green Mountain Club Inc Debonis

The mission of the green mountain club is to make the vermont mountains play a larger part in the life of the people by protecting and maintaining the long trail system and fostering, through education, the stewardship of vermont's hiking…

—
6
Pacific Crest Trail Association

The pacific crest trail association's mission is to advocate for the pacific crest trail as an inspirational outdoor experience, to connect people to the pct, and to conserve the trail.

—
7
The Rockbridge Area Conservation Council

The mission of the rockbridge area conservation council (rockbridge conservation or rc) is to promote and enhance the protection, sustainable use, and stewardship of our community's natural and cultural resources.

—
8
Discover Life in America Inc

Dlia will develop a model for research in biodiversity and will use the knowledge to develop and disseminate information to encourage the discovery, understanding, preservation, and enjoyment of natural resources.

Environment
9
Conserving Carolina

To protect, restore, and inspire appreciation of the natural world.

Environment
10
Alliance for the Shenandoah Valley

Alliance for the shenandoah valley informs and engages people to protect the natural resources, cultural heritages, and rural character of our region.

Community Improvement
11
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
12
West Creek Conservancy

Our mission is to enrich the lives of all people in northeast ohio by conserving natural habitats, restoring the ecological value of our region's lands and waters, and expanding opportunities to connect people from all cultures to…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Groundwork Usa Inc; the most unlike its peers is Kid Pan Alley. 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

17 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. 17 of the 24 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/17
Grantees still filing
12/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NATIONAL MALL AND MEMORIAL PARKS: $2,918,764 · OtherNATIONAL MALL AND MEMORIAL PARKS+9 more: $134,388 · OtherCONSERVATION LEGACY: $1,158,640 · Youth DevelopmentCONSERVATION LEGACYSHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK TRUST: $222,760 · EnvironmentSHENANDOA…THE PIEDMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $105,917 · EnvironmentTHE PIEDM…BLUE RIDGE PRISM INC: $61,070 · EnvironmentBLUE RIDG…THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $19,019 · Environment+1 more: $11,066 · EnvironmentSHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK ASSOC INC: $65,683 · Recreation & SportsCornell University: $30,000 · EducationVIRGINIA TECH FOUNDATION INC: $8,995 · EducationSoul Trak Outdoors: $20,000 · Human ServicesSMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: $8,000 · Arts & CultureKid Pan Alley: $8,000 · Arts & CultureGROUNDWORK RVA INC: $10,048 · Community ImprovementGROUNDWORK USA INC: $5,253 · Community Improvement
Other$3,053,152Youth Development$1,158,640Environment$419,832Recreation & Sports$65,683Education$38,995Human Services$20,000Arts & Culture$16,000Community Improvement$15,301

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 budgetCONSERVATION LEGACY: $1,158,640 over 8y, 0.5% of budgetSHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK TRUST: $222,760 over 4y, 5.8% of budgetTHE PIEDMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $105,917 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetSHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK ASSOC INC: $65,683 over 4y, 5.6% of budgetBLUE RIDGE PRISM INC: $61,070 over 1y, 23% of budgetCornell University: $30,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPotomac Appalachian Trail Club: $28,459 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetSoul Trak Outdoors: $20,000 over 2y, 3.3% of budgetTHE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $19,019 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGROUNDWORK RVA INC: $10,048 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetCITIZENS' CONSERVATION CORPS OF WV: $9,123 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetVIRGINIA TECH FOUNDATION INC: $8,995 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetARCHEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF VIRGINIA: $8,923 over 1y, 7.1% of budgetSMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: $8,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGROUNDWORK USA INC: $5,253 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

National Park Foundat…National Fish and Wil…American ForestsNetwork for GoodDonor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Park FoundationDC17.6× affinity6 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Park Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · American Forests · Network for Good · 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 Shenandoah National Park Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Shenandoah National Park Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report 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 24 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 Shenandoah National Park’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