Minnesota · Nonprofit
VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY
VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY (Minnesota) receives grants from 6 organizations whose IRS filings report $42,080 to it, the largest being NORTHFIELD SHARES ($16,500). 1 of them have funded it in more than one year, and 57% of the money arrives through donor-advised or pass-through sponsors rather than from an institution directly.
Against its field
VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY runs a healthier operating margin than three-quarters of the 9,650 arts & culture nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 9,650 arts & culture nonprofits under $100k, FY2025
Three funders worth looking at
Grantmakers with no record of funding this organization, ranked by how strongly the co-funder graph and the mission embeddings agree. The evidence is in section 03.
- Faribault Foundation Inclocal
- Jeffris Family Foundation Ltdportfolio match
- The William G Pomeroy Foundationportfolio match
The organization over time
Each line starts at 100 in 2023, so what you read is the shape rather than the size: 150 means half as much again as 2023, 50 means half. The number beside each label in the key is where it ended. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
How it's funded, over time
Each bar is one year's revenue split into where it came from, and every bar is the same height — these are shares, not amounts, so a year that raised twice as much looks the same size. Hover a bar for the split.
72% of VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY’s revenue is contributions — about as donation-reliant as the typical peer (78% for the typical peer).
Surplus & reserves
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 0 of the last 3 reported years ran a deficit.
reserve
Who funds it, year by year
2019 → 2023: the base narrowed from 2 funders to 1 funder, grant income fell $23k → $16.
3 of 6 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 57% of grant dollars received. That money is really individual donors directing a sponsor; the institutions to cultivate are the non-DAF funders.
From the IRS filings of VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024–FY2026 are still being filed and are shown unshaded; they do not move any figure on this page.
How concentrated its funding is
VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY leans on a few funders — its largest provides 39% of grant income and the top three 80%; half comes from just 2 funders.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 2 funders to its left
95% of the income these shares are computed over arrives through pass-through sponsors or from payers whose filings do not say what kind of payment it is. Concentration is still measured over all of it, because the money is real; what it does not support is a claim about how many institutions have chosen to fund VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY.
Largest funder’s share by year: 2019 73% · 2020 100% · 2021 100% · 2022 100% · 2023 100% — growing more concentrated.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024–FY2026 are still being filed and are shown unshaded; they do not move any figure on this page.
Where its funders are
57% of VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY's grant income arrives through donor-advised or pass-through sponsors, whose addresses record where the money is held rather than where the donor is. Of the $18k that is directly attributable, 66% of it comes from Minnesota funders.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Funder states come from each funder’s own filing. $24k arriving through sponsors registered in 3 states is excluded from the map and the split above: a sponsor holds money on a donor’s behalf, so its registered address would place those dollars somewhere no donor need ever have been. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024–FY2026 are still being filed and are shown unshaded; they do not move any figure on this page.
Funders to approach
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first. Your 6 funders put you under-funded among the 400 organizations that share them.
- Faribault Foundation InclocalMN · funds 14 organizations near you
- Jeffris Family Foundation Ltdportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- The William G Pomeroy Foundationportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- American Battlefield Trustportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Preservation League of New York Stateportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- New Hampshire Preservation Allianceportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Co Tua Marion S Covington Fdnportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Ohio & Erie Canal Associationportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Virginia Historical Societyportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Peggy N & Roger G Gerry Charitableportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- 1772 Foundation Incportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United Statesportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Organizations like VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
In Minnesota
Nationally
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
Where the money goes
87% of spending goes to programs.
Governance
Public support
37%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Footprint & structure
Files a return copy in 1 state
Screen this organization
A dated, signed PDF of the compliance screen for VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY: IRS status (Business Master File, Publication 78, auto-revocation), the OFAC sanctions lists, the Internal Revenue Bulletin, and California registration, with the Rev. Proc. 2018-32 §8.01 reliance elements stated element by element. Generated from the current files at the moment you download it.
Screens are triage, not determinations; a source that cannot be read reports not screened, never clear. How the screen works · on the API as GET /api/screening/{ein}?format=pdf
Questions and answers
- Who funds VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY?
- VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY (Minnesota) receives grants from 6 organizations whose IRS filings report $42,080 to it, the largest being NORTHFIELD SHARES ($16,500). 1 of them have funded it in more than one year, and 57% of the money arrives through donor-advised or pass-through sponsors rather than from an institution directly.
- How many funders does VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY have?
- IRS filings report 6 organizations giving $42,080 in grants to VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY, 1 of which have funded it in more than one year.
- Who is the largest funder of VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY?
- NORTHFIELD SHARES is the largest funder on record, with $16,500 in grants. The full list of funders is on this page.
- How can an organization like VALLEY GROVE PRESERVATION SOCIETY find more funders?
- Start with the funders already giving here, then look at the foundations that back similar organizations in Minnesota. The funding by cause and by state pages list the largest funders for a given area and how to approach them.
These figures are read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML: this organization’s own return for FY2025 (financials across 2023–2025), and the filings of 6funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. Trends on this page end at FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving; later years are shown and marked, and move no figure. Data on this page was exported August 27, 2026. What this page cannot tell you · view filing