Skip to content

· Private foundation

Babbitt Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$400
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$175
Largest
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Food & Nutrition$11kEducation$7kHuman Services$6kInternational$5kCommunity Improvement$5kAnimals$5kArts & Culture$5kEmployment$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$25
Median grant
2
States reached
$13k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Goodwill$175
AMVETS$125
Kashf Foundation$25
CJSC Humo Bank$25
Individual grant recipient$25
Individual grant recipient$25
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.

US giving: 65% of grant dollars ($31k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 35% that went abroad ($16k) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 85% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%The Conversation: $100 → 16%Omaha Jitterbugs: $4k → 12%The Deming Institute: $100 → 7%Foundation for Critical Thinking: $40 → 8%Kiva: $1k → 10%Corning Community Food Pantry: $3k → 13%AMVETS: $125 → 13%Second Time Around Thrift: $323 → 14%Megan Rathbun: $2k → 15%THE GULLAH MUSEUM: $1k → 15%Goodwill of Greater Washington DC: $118 → 14%Goodwill: $175 → 8%Alliance for Better Nonprofits: $56 → 12%Zidisha: $4k → 4%Goodwill Industries of Kentucky: $1k → 15%Omaha Jitterbugs: $150 → 12%Kiva: $100 → 10%Corning Community Food Pantry: $3k → 13%Goodwill of Western New York: $72 → 13%The National Soaring Museum: $220 → 15%Zidisha: $373 → 4%GOODWILL INC: $731 → 15%Sing Omaha: $3k → 12%KIVA: $76 → 10%Corning Community Food Pantry: $3k → 13%ZIDISHA: $53 → 4%Corning Community Food Pantry: $2k → 13%Corning Community Food Pantry: $289 → 13%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

ID
MI
NY
MA
PA
CA
NE
KY
VA
TN
SC
DC

Beyond the US: 35% of all-years giving ($16k)

8 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Canada$12k · 3 grants
Israel$4k · 1 grant
Philippines$50 · 1 grant
Ecuador$40 · 1 grant
Sierra Leone$25 · 1 grant
Pakistan$25 · 1 grant
Tajikistan$25 · 1 grant
Liberia$25 · 1 grant
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
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 15% of Babbitt Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Babbitt Family Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 30% 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.

48%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$22k · 4 repeat orgs$24k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +126% since the first grant, against +36% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
22

Total granted

$22k
$24k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+126%
+36%

Still filing today

25%
32%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 44% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $225 went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureEducationFood & NutritionEmploymentOther
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

  • CC
    Corning Community Food Pantry
    2× · 2019–2020 · $10k · revenue +126%
  • OB
    Old Brewery Mission
    2× · 2021–2022 · $7k
  • ZI
    ZIDISHA INC
    3× · 2020–2023 · $4k

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
  • OJ
    OMAHA JITTERBUGSgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +60%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $4k
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
Kobo Inc

Kobo's mission is to empower individuals and organizations to generate insights and make informed decisions that drive positive change around the world.

International
2
Internet Archive

Internet Archive was founded in 1996 to build an Internet library with the purpose of offering permanent access for researchers, historians and scholars to historical collections that exist in digital format including texts, audio, movies,…

Human Services
3
Musopen

Musopen is a 501c3 non-profit focused on improving access and exposure to music by creating free resources and educational materials. We provide recordings, sheet music, music applications and educational materials to the public for free,…

Arts & Culture
4
Global Investigative Journalism Network Inc

To support the training and sharing of information among journalists worldwide in investigative and computer-assisted reporting.

Arts & Culture
5
Kinosaito Inc

Kinosaito inc has undertaken the responsibility, purpose and mission of stimulating, promoting and developing the interest of the american public in the fine arts as well as dramatic and ther performance arts.

Arts & Culture
6
Knowledge Standards Foundation

Make the encyclosphere the universal network of encyclopedias. the encylosphere is a network of encyclopedias presently existing and future, large and small. encyclopedia articles are to the encylosphere what blog posts are to the…

Education
7
International Consortium of Investigative Journalists Inc

International consortium of investigative journalists, inc.'s (icij) mission is to show people how the world really works through stories that rock the world; forcing positive change.

International
8
International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation

The ifrs foundation's mission is to develop ifrs standards that bring transparency, accountability and efficiency to capital markets around the world. our work serves the public interest by fostering trust, growth and long-term financial…

Community Improvement
9
Kqed Inc

See schedule okqed serves the people of northern california with a community-supported alternative to commercial media, providing the knowledge needed to make informed decisions; convening community dialogue; bringing the arts to everyone;…

Arts & Culture
10
Nanban Foundation

Nanban foundation strives to provide free, high-quality financial education for all. the organization functions with the support of volunteers united by one common goal: knowledge sharing. embracing online education, we invite people of…

Education
11
Microfinance Opportunities
Education
12
Disinformation Index Inc

Disinformation index is a nonpartisan organization that combats disinformation both in the united states and globally through the creation of public ratings of media sources that assess their disinformation risk using objective criteria.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wikimedia Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Foundation for Critical Thinking. 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

11 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. 11 of the 32 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)
9/11
Grantees still filing
10/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Old Brewery Mission: $6,650 · OtherOld Brewery MissionIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $4,493 · OtherIndividual grant recipientZIDISHA INC: $4,005 · OtherZIDISHA INCIndividual grant recipient: $1,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTHE GULLAH MUSEUM: $1,299 · OtherGOODWILL INC: $906 · Other+16 more: $1,741 · Other+16 moreCorning Community Food Pantry: $10,314 · Food & NutritionCorning Community Food P…OMAHA JITTERBUGS: $4,501 · Arts & CultureOMAHA JITTERBUGSSINGOMAHA INC: $3,000 · Arts & CultureSINGOMAHA INC+2 more: $260 · Arts & CultureGOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF KENTUCKY INC: $1,344 · EmploymentKIVA MICROFUNDS: $1,176 · InternationalDONORSCHOOSEORG: $841 · EducationWIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC: $100 · Education
Other$25,594Food & Nutrition$10,314Arts & Culture$7,761Employment$1,344International$1,176Education$941

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 budgetCorning Community Food Pantry: $10,314 over 2y, 3.8% of budgetOMAHA JITTERBUGS: $4,501 over 1y, 7.4% of budgetSINGOMAHA INC: $3,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetGOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF KENTUCKY INC: $1,344 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKIVA MICROFUNDS: $1,176 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDONORSCHOOSEORG: $841 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL SOARING MUSEUM: $220 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALLIANCE FOR BETTER NONPROFITS: $56 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR CRITICAL THINKING: $40 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 Corning Community Food Pantry ↗
  • Who funds OMAHA JITTERBUGS ↗
  • Who funds ZIDISHA INC ↗
  • Who funds SINGOMAHA INC ↗
  • Who funds GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF KENTUCKY INC ↗
  • Who funds KIVA MICROFUNDS ↗
  • Who funds DONORSCHOOSEORG ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL SOARING MUSEUM ↗
  • Who funds WIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds ALLIANCE FOR BETTER NONPROFITS ↗
  • Who funds FOUNDATION FOR CRITICAL THINKING ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.2× affinity6 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Babbitt Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Babbitt Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%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
    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 32 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 Babbitt Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph