Skip to content
The Backcountry Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

The Backcountry 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.

$666k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$646k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Recreation & Sports$1.9MEducation$1.7MScience & Tech$1.1MHealth$552kEnvironment$100kFood & Nutrition$50kInternational$50kCivil Rights$50kOther$0
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $8k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $12k
  • $250k+1 grant · $646k
$12,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$4.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
USA NORDIC SPORT$646,000
INNERSCIENCE RESEARCH FUND$12,000
ST STEPHENS EPISCOPAL SCHOOL$5,000
LEBANON OUTING CLUB$3,300
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 (FY22–22, $40k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 25% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%GIVE TO GIVE FOUNDATION: $10k → 17%NATURAL GOODNESS FOUNDATION: $30k → 8%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

NH
WA
MI
NY
PA
CT
CA
UT
DC
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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.6M · 7 repeat orgs$641k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +39% since the first grant, against +32% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
14

Total granted

$4.6M
$638k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
+32%

Still filing today

71%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Science & TechHealthHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsInternationalFood & NutritionOther
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

  • UN
    USA Nordic Sport
    8× · 2017–2024 · $1.8M · revenue +21% · 43% of their budget
  • THE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH
    2× · 2020–2023 · $300k · revenue +250%
  • FK
    FORD K SAYRE MEMORIAL SKI COUNCIL INC
    2× · 2017–2021 · $73k · revenue +39%

Funded once

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS - AUSTIN
    one grant, 2022 · $200k
  • PI
    Pacific Institute of Medical Research
    one grant, 2021 · $100k · revenue +19% · 32% of their budget
  • FF
    FOUNDATION FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND EXPRESSION INC
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +11%
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
Neuroscience Innovation Foundation
Health
2
Neurolinx Research Institute

Neuroscience research

Health
3
New York Genome Center Inc

Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.

Health
4
The Translational Genomics Research Institute

Please see schedule o

Health
5
Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute

Sanford burnham prebys medical discovery institute's mission is to advance the biomedical sciences by cultivating the next generation of scientific leaders, providing meaningful opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to learn,…

Health
6
The Lieber Institute Inc

The mission of the institute is to translate basic genetic and molecular mechanisms of schizophrenia and related developmental brain disorders into clinical advances that change the lives of affected individuals. it is catalyzing a new…

Health
7
Institute for Neurodegenerative Disorders

Medical research to learn about causes and possible cures for neurodegenerative disorders such as alzheimer and parkinson disorder.

Health
8
Society for Neuroscience

Sfn's mission is to: 1. advance the understanding of the brain and the nervous system by bringing together scientists of all segments of neuroscience, by facilitating the integration of research directed at all levels of biological…

Health
9
Van Andel Research Institute

Medical research organization van andel research institute is an independent biomedical research organization committed to improving the health and enhancing the lives of current and future generations.

Health
10
Institute for Advanced Study - Louis Bamberger & Mrs Felix Fuld Foundation

The institute for advanced study (the institute) is one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry. see schedule o.

Science & Tech
11
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

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.

Education
12
Us-Japan Research Institute Suite 801
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Give to Give Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Lebanon Outing Club Inc. 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

16 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 16 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
13/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

USA Nordic Sport: $1,834,900 · Recreation & SportsUSA Nordic SportYALE UNIVERSITY: $1,244,934 · OtherYALE UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OF TEXAS - AUSTIN: $200,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF TEXAS - AUSTINTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $100,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYFORD K SAYRE MEMORIAL SKI COUNCIL INC: $73,237 · Other+11 more: $210,800 · Other+11 moreTHE AXION RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $1,078,377 · Science & TechTHE AXION RESEARCH FOUN…GIVE TO RESEARCH: $72,000 · Science & TechGIVE TO RESEARCHTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH: $300,000 · HealthPacific Institute of Medical Research: $100,000 · HealthTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $200,000 · EducationEmory University: $50,000 · EducationFOUNDATION FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND EXPRESSION INC: $50,000 · Civil RightsNUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE INC: $50,000 · International
Recreation & Sports$1,834,900Other$1,828,971Science & Tech$1,150,377Health$400,000Education$250,000Civil Rights$50,000International$50,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUSA Nordic Sport: $1,834,900 over 8y, 43% of budgetTHE AXION RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $1,078,377 over 4y, 44% of budgetTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH: $300,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $200,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPacific Institute of Medical Research: $100,000 over 1y, 32% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFORD K SAYRE MEMORIAL SKI COUNCIL INC: $73,237 over 2y, 11% of budgetGIVE TO RESEARCH: $72,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND EXPRESSION INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEmory University: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURAL GOODNESS FOUNDATION INC: $30,000 over 1y, 53% of budgetTHE GIVE TO GIVE FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetLebanon Outing Club Inc: $3,300 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetNANSEN SKI CLUB INC: $1,500 over 1y, 2.4% 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 Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…American Endowment Fo…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
National Philanthropic TrustPA9.5× affinity6 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 The Backcountry Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Backcountry Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%4%15%34%60%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
    1get no government money at all
    3report 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Backcountry’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