Skip to content

· Private foundation

Vara Educational Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$44k
Granted FY2025still arriving
31
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What it funds
0187% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Education$88kHuman Services$52kRecreation & Sports$26kOther$0
02FY2025 · 31 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$666k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$3,350
Individual grant recipient$3,000
Individual grant recipient$3,000
Individual grant recipient$3,000
Individual grant recipient$3,000
Individual grant recipient$3,000
Individual grant recipient$3,000
KILLINGTON SKI CLUB$1,150
MOUNT MANSFIELD SKI CLUB AND ACADEMY$1,150
COCHRANS SKI CLUB$1,150
GREEN MOUNTAIN VALLEY SCHOOL$1,150
PICO SKI CLUB$1,150
MIDDLEBURY SKI CLUB$1,150
BURKE MOUNTAIN ACADEMY$1,150
SMUGGLERS NOTCH SKI CLUB$1,150
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 (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 97% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%JOSEPH FLAHERTY: $500 → 7%OLIVIA HOLM: $1k → 9%CLAIRE WALTERS: $500 → 10%VICTORIA CLANCY: $500 → 5%OKEMO MOUNTAIN SCHOOL: $1k → 9%MIDDLEBURY SKI CLUB: $1k → 9%SMUGGLERS NOTCH SKI CLUB: $2k → 9%GREEN MOUNTAIN VALLEY SCHOOL: $6k → 9%ERIKA WIEBE: $750 → 10%STRATTON MOUNTAIN SCHOOL: $3k → 11%BROMLEY OUTING CLUB: $1k → 11%JOHN PROFITT: $750 → 12%SHAMUS MCKIM: $1k → 12%AIDEN BENNETT: $1k → 12%TANNER GRAVES: $500 → 9%AVA DALL: $750 → 7%COLE FIRSTBROOK: $500 → 9%OKEMO MOUNTAIN SCHOOL: $650 → 9%MIDDLEBURY SKI CLUB: $1k → 9%SMUGGLERS NOTCH SKI CLUB: $1k → 9%KILLINGTON MOUNTAIN SCHOOL: $4k → 9%COCHRANS SKI CLUB: $4k → 10%STRATTON WINTER SPORTS CLUB: $1k → 11%NOLAN SWEENEY: $500 → 12%SHELBY GRAVES: $500 → 9%KELLY GEBHARDT: $1k → 9%SILAS JACKSON: $500 → 9%HAZEL HOWARD: $500 → 9%GREEN MOUNTAIN VALLEY SCHOOL: $1k → 9%COCHRANS SKI CLUB: $1k → 10%HARRISON DIGANGI: $1k → 11%JULIA HANUS: $500 → 12%AMBER WOOD: $500 → 9%AIDAN ROBIN: $2k → 9%KILLINGTON SKI CLUB: $1k → 9%VIVA GOETZE: $1k → 10%CHLOE LATHROP: $750 → 11%LAUREN CAHILL: $500 → 12%BODE WOOD: $500 → 9%MOUNT MANSFIELD SKI CLUB AND ACADEMY: $1k → 9%ADA JONES: $500 → 9%CARLY ELSINGER: $1k → 10%STRATTON WINTER SPORTS CLUB: $650 → 11%CURTIS WHEELER: $500 → 12%ALEXANDER CHUDZIK: $500 → 9%NICK CALCAGNI: $500 → 9%JACK HAYDEN: $500 → 10%MOUNT SNOW ACADEMY: $1k → 11%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
NH
WA
NY
MA
WY
PA
NJ
CT
UT
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.

50%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$92k · 31 repeat orgs$90k to everyone else

31 repeat relationships: 16 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

31
75

Total granted

$92k
$67k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
+8%

Still filing today

19%
4%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 46% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $24k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Recreation & SportsEducationYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • BM
    BURKE MOUNTAIN ACADEMY INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $8k · revenue +8%
  • GM
    GREEN MOUNTAIN VALLEY SCHOOL INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $7k · revenue +35%
  • PS
    PICO SKI CLUB INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $4k · revenue +26%

Funded once

  • KM
    KILLINGTON MOUNTAIN SCHOOL INC
    one grant, 2024 · $4k · revenue +20%
  • SM
    STRATTON MOUNTAIN SCHOOL
    one grant, 2024 · $3k · revenue +8%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $3k
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
Mt Washington Valley Alpine Education Foundation

To provide education instruction to boys and girls in the sport of skiing, physical fitness, leadership and sportsmanship. formal skiing instruction is provided and students participate in skiing related races and events.

Education
2
Franconia Ski Club

Provide ski race training for USAA sanctioned program for 100+ participants (athletes) and sponsor USAA sanctioned races and related services

Recreation & Sports
3
New York Ski Educational Foundation Inc

The Organization operates training programs and facilities at five venues in the Adirondacks and Catskills to provide opportunities for athletes of all ages to reach their potential in snow sports.

—
4
Mount Mansfield Ski Educational Foundation Inc

Education and training of ski racers

—
5
The International Water Ski Racing Association Inc
Recreation & Sports
6
Schweitzer Alpine Racing School

To provide youth with the experience and skills needed to become proficient skiers, snowboarders and nordic athletes. in addition, sars provides appropriate training to junior olympic bound racers.

—
7
The Buck Hill Ski Racing Club

Promoting youth skiing and racing through coaching, training and events.

—
8
The Nipmuc Ski Club Inc
Recreation & Sports
9
New York State Ski Racing Association Alpine Inc

Under the auspices of united states ski and snowboard, nyssra fosters well developed programs and athletes by providing the structure, direction, resources and support required for athletes to reach their individual potential without…

—
10
Alpental-Snoqualmie Ski Foundation

Educate and train future ski racing champions. we help alpine ski racers achieve their racing potential through the highest level of physical conditioning, race training and professional coaching.

—
11
Big Sky Ski Education Foundation

Big Sky Ski Education Foundation offers competitive Alpine, Freeride, and Nordic skiing programs.

—
12
Payette Lakes Ski Club Inc

The purpose of the organization is to provide alpine and nordic ski terrain, competition and instruction for the community and children of the area.

Recreation & Sports
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mt Mansfield Ski Club and Academy; the most unlike its peers is Killington Mountain School 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

10 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. 10 of the 121 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

+112 more: $149,400 · Other+112 moreBURKE MOUNTAIN ACADEMY INC: $8,375 · EducationBURKE MOUN…GREEN MOUNTAIN VALLEY SCHOOL INC: $7,050 · EducationGREEN MOUN…MT MANSFIELD SKI CLUB AND ACADEMY: $1,650 · EducationMT MANSFIE…COCHRANS SKI CLUB INC: $4,700 · Recreation & SportsCOCHRANS …PICO SKI CLUB INC: $3,700 · Recreation & SportsPICO SKI …STRATTON MOUNTAIN SCHOOL: $2,725 · Recreation & SportsSTRATTON …Middlebury Ski Club Inc: $2,250 · Recreation & SportsMiddlebur…KILLINGTON SKI CLUB INC: $1,150 · Recreation & SportsKILLINGTO…BROMLEY OUTING CLUB INC: $1,100 · Youth Development
Other$149,400Education$17,075Recreation & Sports$14,525Youth Development$1,100

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBURKE MOUNTAIN ACADEMY INC: $8,375 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetGREEN MOUNTAIN VALLEY SCHOOL INC: $7,050 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCOCHRANS SKI CLUB INC: $4,700 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetKILLINGTON MOUNTAIN SCHOOL INC: $4,050 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPICO SKI CLUB INC: $3,700 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetSTRATTON MOUNTAIN SCHOOL: $2,725 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMiddlebury Ski Club Inc: $2,250 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetMT MANSFIELD SKI CLUB AND ACADEMY: $1,650 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetKILLINGTON SKI CLUB INC: $1,150 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBROMLEY OUTING CLUB INC: $1,100 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.

  • Who funds BURKE MOUNTAIN ACADEMY INC ↗
  • Who funds GREEN MOUNTAIN VALLEY SCHOOL INC ↗
  • Who funds COCHRANS SKI CLUB INC ↗
  • Who funds KILLINGTON MOUNTAIN SCHOOL INC ↗
  • Who funds PICO SKI CLUB INC ↗
  • Who funds STRATTON MOUNTAIN SCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds Middlebury Ski Club Inc ↗
  • Who funds MT MANSFIELD SKI CLUB AND ACADEMY ↗

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.

The Bank of America Charitable Foundation IncNC7.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · 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 Vara Educational Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Vara Educational Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 70%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Killington Mountain School Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
7get 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
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Vara Educational Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Vara Educational Foundation Inc 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.

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 121 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Vara Educational’s filings →

More from the funding graph