Skip to content

· Public charity

The Morton Arboretum

To collect, study, display, and conserve trees and other plants from around the world to inspire learning, foster enjoyment, benefit communities, encourage action, and enhance the environment.

$1.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
48
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$75k
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 2024.

Environment$4.3MScience & Tech$61kHealth$31kFood & Nutrition$28kArts & Culture$18k
02FY2024 · 48 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 48 grants below total $1,141,397, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,465,749 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $324,352 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k6 grants · $39k
  • $10k–50k37 grants · $777k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $325k
$24,750
Median grant
5
States reached
$368M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITY OF CHICAGO$75,000
ROSELLE PARK DISTRICT$73,443
CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY$70,494
FOREST PRESERVE DISTRICT OF COOK COUNTY$55,000
OPENLANDS$51,414
VILLAGE OF WESTCHESTER$40,000
HAWTHORN WOODS$40,000
CITY OF NAPERVILLE$30,000
BELVIDERE TOWNSHIP PARK DISTRICT$27,933
VILLAGE OF BECKEMEYER$27,331
VILLAGE OF OSWEGO$25,000
CITY OF OTTAWA$25,000
VILLAGE OF DEERFIELD$25,000
VILLAGE OF GLENDALE HEIGHTS$25,000
VILLAGE OF LAKE BLUFF$25,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 61% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%BOTANICAL GARDENS - HUNTINGTON: $34k → 14%MONTGOMERY BOTANICAL CENTER: $40k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF CONNETICUT: $43k → 11%ATLANTA BOTANICAL GARDEN: $72k → 13%DAVEY TREE EXPERT CO: $57k → 12%VILLAGE OF OSWEGO: $25k → 6%THE LAND CONSERVANCY OF MCHENRY COUNTY: $33k → 6%VILLAGE OF BECKEMEYER: $27k → 8%BELVIDERE TOWNSHIP PARK DISTRICT: $28k → 9%CITY OF OTTAWA: $25k → 15%DAVEY RESOURCE GROUP: $171k → 7%UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT AND STATE AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE: $46k → 10%BOTANIC GARDENS CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL (US): $33k → 14%MONTGOMERY BOTANICAL CENTER: $38k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT: $42k → 11%ATLANTA BOTANICAL GARDEN: $51k → 13%DAVEY TREE EXPERT: $52k → 12%ATLANTA BOTANICAL GARDEN: $50k → 13%VILLAGE OF BANNOCKBURN: $25k → 8%OPENLANDS: $65k → 14%CITY OF ROCKFORD: $25k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT: $37k → 10%VILLAGE OF DEERFIELD: $25k → 8%OPENLANDS PROJECT: $60k → 14%OPENLANDS: $51k → 14%OPENLANDS PROJECT: $48k → 14%KENDALL COUNTY FOREST PRESERVE DISTRICT: $50k → 6%CITY OF WEST CHICAGO: $25k → 7%LAKE COUNTY FOREST PRESERVES: $60k → 8%OPENLANDS: $43k → 14%VILLAGE OF MOKENA: $25k → 7%VILLAGE OF WESTCHESTER: $40k → 14%CITY OF CHICAGO: $30k → 14%CITY OF NAPERVILLE: $30k → 7%VILLAGE OF GRAYSLAKE: $25k → 8%THE FIELD MUSEUM: $25k → 14%ROSELLE PARK DISTRICT: $73k → 7%VILLAGE OF WESTERN SPRINGS: $25k → 14%FOREST PRESERVE DISTRICT OF DUPAGE COUNTY: $40k → 7%FOREST PRESERVE DISTRICT OF DUPAGE COUNTY: $25k → 7%VILLAGE OF GLENDALE HEIGHTS: $25k → 7%HAWTHORN WOODS: $40k → 8%DAVEY RESOURCE GROUP INC: $29k → 7%CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: $70k → 14%VILLAGE OF GLENVIEW: $30k → 14%CHICAGO PARK DISTRICT: $100k → 14%FOREST PRESERVE DISTRICT OF COOK COUNTY: $55k → 14%FOREST PRESERVE OF COOK COUNTY: $30k → 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
WA
IL
WI
MI
OH
CT
CA
VA
AZ
AL
GA
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $324k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions, $169k to organizations and $155k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

North America (Canada and Mexico)$179k · 55% · 2 grants · 7 people

Stated purpose: GLOBAL TREE CONSERVATION RESEARCH SUPPORT

Central America and the Caribbean$128k · 40% · 4 grants · 1 person

Stated purpose: GLOBAL TREE CONSERVATION RESEARCH SUPPORT

East Asia and the Pacific$17k · 5% · 1 grant · 1 person

Stated purpose: CONFERENCE SPONSORSHIP · GLOBAL TREE CONSERVATION RESEARCH SUPPORT

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 8% of The Morton Arboretum’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 77% of the giving stays in IL; by stated purpose, 75%.

The Morton Arboretumlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 10% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

57%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.5M · 41 repeat orgs$1.9M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +109% since the first grant, against +30% for those funded once.

41 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2024, 28 since wound down; 34 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

41
73

Total granted

$2.5M
$1.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+109%
+30%

Still filing today

17%
12%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 33% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $769k 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
EnvironmentArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementEducationReligionOther
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

  • O
    OPENLANDS
    6× · 2017–2024 · $278k · revenue +166%
  • TA
    THE ATLANTA BOTANICAL GARDEN INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $179k · revenue +70%
  • MB
    MONTGOMERY BOTANICAL CENTER
    3× · 2021–2023 · $100k · revenue +78%

Funded once

  • CP
    CHICAGO PARK DISTRICT
    one grant, 2023 · $100k
  • TL
    THE LAKE COUNTRY FOREST PRESERVE DISTRICT
    one grant, 2022 · $60k
  • KC
    Kendall County Forest Preserve District
    one grant, 2022 · $50k
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
The Holden Arboretum

The holden arboretum connects people with the wonder, beauty, and value of trees and plants, to inspire action for healthy communities.

Environment
2
Sonoma Botanical Garden
—
3
Fairchild Tropical Botanic Garden Inc

We harness the power of plants for humankind and share the joy and beauty of tropical gardening with everyone. fairchild tropical botanic garden is a museum of tropical plants within a world famous, 83-acre designed landscape. it was…

Environment
4
New York Botanical Garden

The new york botanical garden is a museum of plants and a scientific research center devoted to the study of plants and their uses. it is the garden's mission to improve public understanding of the natural world, horticulture, and the…

Environment
5
Missouri Botanical Garden Board of Trustees

To discover and share knowledge about plants and their environment in order to preserve and enrich life.

Environment
6
Heartlands Conservancy

The mission of heartlands conservancy is to empower and colaborate with the people of southern illinois to advance and protect the health of our distinctive communities and nationally significant natural and cultural resources.

Environment
7
National Tropical Botanical Garden

To enrich life by perpetuating tropical plants, ecosystems and cultural heritage through discovery, scientific research, conservation, and education.

Environment
8
Phipps Conservatory and Botanical Gardens Inc

Phipps' mission is to inspire and educate all with the beauty and importance of plants, to advance sustainability and promote human and environmental well-being through action and research, and to celebrate its historic glasshouse.

Environment
9
Nature Collective

Nature collective's mission is to drive a passion for nature for all. we think inclusively and diversely when serving those devoid of nature those who remember nature and want to connect back to it and those who have an affinity with…

Environment
10
Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden

Rancho santa ana botanic gardens promotes botany, conservation, and horticulture to inspire, inform and educate the public and scientific community about california's native flora. the garden is devoted to the collection, cultivation,…

Environment
11
Denver Botanic Gardens Inc

To connect people with plants, especially plants from the rocky mountain region and similar regions around the world, providing delight and enlightenment to everyone.

Environment
12
Houston Botanic Garden

To enrich life through discovery, education, and the conservation of plants and the natural environment.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chicago Horticultural Society; the most unlike its peers is Montgomery Botanical Center. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

20 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. 20 of the 149 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/20
Grantees still filing
13/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

OPENLANDS: $277,860 · OtherOPENLANDSDAVEY RESOURCE GROUP: $200,000 · OtherCITY OF CHICAGO: $180,027 · OtherForest Preserve District of Cook County: $132,257 · Other+130 more: $3,031,105 · Other+130 moreTHE ATLANTA BOTANICAL GARDEN INC: $178,826 · EnvironmentTHE ATLANTA…BOTANIC GARDENS CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL US INC: $80,391 · EnvironmentBOTANIC GAR…CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: $70,494 · EnvironmentCHICAGO HOR…FRIENDS OF THE FOREST PRESERVE DISTRICT OF DUPAGE COUNTY: $40,000 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF …THE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $22,637 · EnvironmentURBAN FOREST CARBON REGISTRY: $21,000 · EnvironmentNatureServe: $15,000 · Environment+2 more: $14,896 · EnvironmentNEIGHBORSPACE: $24,273 · Community ImprovementSOUTHWEST COLLECTIVE: $23,278 · Community ImprovementFAITH IN PLACE: $44,625 · ReligionFIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY: $25,000 · Arts & CultureHENRY E HUNTINGTON LIBRARY AND ART GALLERY: $18,324 · Arts & CultureYoung Mens Educational Network: $10,000 · Education
Other$3,821,249Environment$443,244Community Improvement$47,551Religion$44,625Arts & Culture$43,324Education$10,000

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 budgetOPENLANDS: $277,860 over 6y, 1.1% of budgetTHE ATLANTA BOTANICAL GARDEN INC: $178,826 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetMONTGOMERY BOTANICAL CENTER: $99,975 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetBOTANIC GARDENS CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL US INC: $80,391 over 3y, 19% of budgetTHE LAND CONSERVANCY OF MCHENRY COUNTY: $77,209 over 5y, 2.1% of budgetCHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: $70,494 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFAITH IN PLACE: $44,625 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE FOREST PRESERVE DISTRICT OF DUPAGE COUNTY: $40,000 over 1y, 19% of budgetFIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNEIGHBORSPACE: $24,273 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetSOUTHWEST COLLECTIVE: $23,278 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetTHE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $22,637 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetURBAN FOREST CARBON REGISTRY: $21,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetHENRY E HUNTINGTON LIBRARY AND ART GALLERY: $18,324 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNatureServe: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCONSERVE LAKE COUNTY: $13,144 over 1y, 6.9% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $11,079 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYoung Mens Educational Network: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetQUAIL BOTANICAL GARDENS FOUNDATION: $7,510 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHUNTSVILLE MADISON COUNTY BOTANICAL GARDEN SOCIETY INC: $7,386 over 1y, 0.1% 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 OPENLANDS ↗
  • Who funds THE ATLANTA BOTANICAL GARDEN INC ↗
  • Who funds MONTGOMERY BOTANICAL CENTER ↗
  • Who funds BOTANIC GARDENS CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL US INC ↗
  • Who funds THE LAND CONSERVANCY OF MCHENRY COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds FAITH IN PLACE ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE FOREST PRESERVE DISTRICT OF DUPAGE COUNTY ↗

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.

OpenlandsIL86.2× affinity40 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Openlands · Metropolitan Mayors Caucus · Illinois Clean Energy Community Foundation · Ageoptions Inc (Fka Suburban Area Agency on Aging) · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Forefront · Trees Forever Inc · The Experimental Station · Greater Chicago Food Depository · The Dupage Community Foundation · Gaylord and Dorothy Donnelley Foundation · Fulk Family Foundation Inc

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 Morton Arboretum funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Morton Arboretum. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Montgomery Botanical Center: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
4report 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 149 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Morton Arboretum’s filings →

More from the funding graph