Skip to content

· Private foundation

74 Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$24k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$20k
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 2025.

Education$116kAnimals$31kCrime & Legal$24kHealth$18kPhilanthropy$12kRecreation & Sports$9kInternational$7kHuman Services$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $4k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
$2,060
Median grant
3
States reached
$370k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Fork Union Military Academy$20,000
Indy Humane$2,060
Christopher D Redding Youth Asthma Found$2,058
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 (FY17–22, $24k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Kids Voice of Indiana: $10k → 16%Kids Voice of Indiana: $5k → 16%Kids Voice of Indiana: $5k → 16%Kids Voice of Indiana: $2k → 16%Kids Voice of Indiana: $2k → 16%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.
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.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$188k · 8 repeat orgs$33k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +45% since the first grant, against -18% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
6

Total granted

$188k
$33k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+45%
-18%

Still filing today

63%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
HealthAnimalsPhilanthropyHuman ServicesYouth 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

  • KV
    KIDS' VOICE OF INDIANA INC
    5× · 2017–2022 · $24k · revenue ×16
  • HS
    HUMANE SOCIETY OF INDIANAPOLIS
    4× · 2022–2025 · $19k · revenue +22%
  • CD
    Christopher D Redding Youth Asthma Foundation
    3× · 2023–2025 · $6k · revenue +203%

Funded once

  • BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY
    one grant, 2022 · $13k · revenue +5%
  • TP
    The People Helping People Network Inc
    one grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue -42%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $5k
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
Animal Samaritans

At Animal Samaritans we champion compassion and respect for all living creatures, with a primary focus on dogs, cats, and the people who love them. We view pets not merely as animals, but as members of our families. As their guardians and…

Animals
2
Humane Society of Tampa Bay Inc

The Humane Society of Tampa Bay is dedicated to ending animal homelessness and providing care and comfort for companion animals in need. Our vision is "Leading the way because every life counts". In 2025, we saved 10,631 animals.

Animals
3
Valley Humane SocietyInc

Valley Humane Society (VHS) creates a brighter future for cats and dogs by encouraging and strengthening the bond between people and pets. VHS rescues and rehabilitates companion animals, champions responsible caretaking, shares pets'…

Animals
4
Catalytic Impact Foundation Inc

To use philanthropic funds to support and accelerate innovation in life sciences and healthcare.

Philanthropy
5
Denver Pet Partners

To deliver excellence in animal-assisted interventions (AAI) and enhance the health and wellness of people through AAI services, education & networking.

Health
6
Childrens House International

Children's house international provides ethical adoption services, child focused recruitment, and family support. we support disadvantaged children with humanitarian aid in countries worldwide.

—
7
Humane Society of Charlotte Inc

Humane Society of Charlotte mission is to champion the wellbeing of companion animals and strengthen their bond with the people who know, love, and need them.

Animals
8
Animal Friends Inc

To rescue, rehabilitate, and rehome animals in crisis, ensure healthy pets through education, advocacy, and affordable services, and inspire a community where the animal-human bond is celebrated and nurtured.

Animals
9
Friends of Pima Animal Care Center

Friends of PACC supports the work of Pima Animal Care Center (PACC) and enhances its efforts to save the lives of pets in need. Our vision is that every pet served by Pima Animal Care Center will be supported with the resources needed for…

Animals
10
Center for Humane Technology

Center for Humane Technology is a nonprofit dedicated to ensuring that the most consequential technologies actually serve humanity. We bring clarity to how the tech ecosystem works in order to shift the incentives that drive it.

Science & Tech
11
Humane Society of Taos Inc dba Stray Hearts Animal Shelter

Stray Hearts is a socially conscious shelter and adoption facility reuniting lost pets with their families and providing humane care and shelter for surrendered, lost, and homeless companion animals in Taos County, New Mexico.Our pledge:…

Animals
12
Pet Pal Rescue Inc

Our mission is to rescue animals from animal shelters that may otherwise be euthanized due to time limitations, illness, injuries or lack of socialization and training.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Humane Society of Indianapolis; the most unlike its peers is The People Helping People Network 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

9 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. 9 of the 15 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FORK UNION MILITARY ACADEMY: $110,000 · OtherFORK UNION MILITARY ACADEMYChristopher D Redding Youth Asthma: $10,000 · OtherChristopher D Redding Youth AsthmaIndividual grant recipient: $6,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $4,983 · Other+2 more: $2,300 · OtherHUMANE SOCIETY OF INDIANAPOLIS: $18,620 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY …BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $12,500 · AnimalsBEST FRIENDS AN…KIDS' VOICE OF INDIANA INC: $24,060 · Human ServicesKIDS' VOICE …The People Helping People Network Inc: $10,000 · PhilanthropyTEAMMATES FOR KIDS FOUNDATION: $3,256 · PhilanthropySocial Impact Fund: $2,000 · PhilanthropyTIMMY GLOBAL HEALTH INC: $6,776 · HealthChristopher D Redding Youth Asthma Foundation: $6,174 · HealthCHAMP CAMP INC: $6,000 · Youth Development
Other$133,283Animals$31,120Human Services$24,060Philanthropy$15,256Health$12,950Youth Development$6,000

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 budgetKIDS' VOICE OF INDIANA INC: $24,060 over 5y, 1.6% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF INDIANAPOLIS: $18,620 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $12,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe People Helping People Network Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetTIMMY GLOBAL HEALTH INC: $6,776 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetChristopher D Redding Youth Asthma Foundation: $6,174 over 3y, 1.6% of budgetCHAMP CAMP INC: $6,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetTEAMMATES FOR KIDS FOUNDATION: $3,256 over 1y, 0.0% 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 KIDS' VOICE OF INDIANA INC ↗
  • Who funds HUMANE SOCIETY OF INDIANAPOLIS ↗
  • Who funds BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds The People Helping People Network Inc ↗
  • Who funds TIMMY GLOBAL HEALTH INC ↗
  • Who funds Christopher D Redding Youth Asthma Foundation ↗
  • Who funds CHAMP CAMP INC ↗
  • Who funds TEAMMATES FOR KIDS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Social Impact Fund ↗

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.

Natl Christian Charitable Fdn IncGA11.2× affinity6 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · 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 74 Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from 74 Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%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
    ⤢ 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.

    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 15 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 74’s filings →

    More from the funding graph