Skip to content
David Lewis Toothaker Char Tr at a glance

· Private foundation

David Lewis Toothaker Char Tr

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$745k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$152k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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.

Health$390kReligion$291kPhilanthropy$190kHuman Services$97k
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$74,350
Median grant
3
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN$152,335
SUPREME COUNCIL BENEVOLENT$149,707
MASONIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATION$145,065
THE MAINE CHILDREN'S HOME$74,350
THE IRIS NETWORK$74,350
PINE TREE SOC FOR CRIPPLED$74,350
ALDERSGATE UNITED METHODIST CHUR$74,350
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 9%, against an area that typically sits at 6%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 6%SUPREME COUNCIL BENEVOLENT: $150k → 8%THE IRIS NETWORK: $74k → 7%PINE TREE SOC FOR CRIPPLED: $74k → 9%ALDERSGATE UNITED METHODIST CHUR: $74k → 11%THE MAINE CHILDREN'S HOME: $74k → 12%SUPREME COUNCIL BENEVOLENT: $9k → 8%THE IRIS NETWORK: $5k → 7%PINE TREE SOC FOR CRIPPLED: $5k → 9%ALDERSGATE UNITED METHODIST CHUR: $5k → 11%THE MAINE CHILDREN'S HOME: $5k → 12%SUPREME COUNCIL BENEVOLENT: $9k → 8%THE IRIS NETWORK: $4k → 7%PINE TREE SOC FOR CRIPPLED: $4k → 9%ALDERSGATE UNITED METHODIST CHUR: $4k → 11%THE MAINE CHILDREN'S HOME: $4k → 12%SUPREME COUNCIL BENEVOLENT: $7k → 8%THE IRIS NETWORK: $3k → 7%PINE TREE SOC FOR CRIPPLED: $3k → 9%ALDERSGATE UNITED METHODIST CHUR: $3k → 11%THE MAINE CHILDREN'S HOME: $3k → 12%SUPREME COUNCIL BENEVOLENT: $6k → 8%THE IRIS NETWORK: $3k → 7%PINE TREE SOC FOR CRIPPLED: $3k → 9%ALDERSGATE UNITED METHODIST CHUR: $3k → 11%THE MAINE CHILDREN'S HOME: $3k → 12%SUPREME COUNCIL BENEVOLENT: $6k → 8%THE IRIS NETWORK: $3k → 7%PINE TREE SOC FOR CRIPPLED: $3k → 9%ALDERSGATE UNITED METHODIST CHUR: $3k → 11%THE MAINE CHILDREN'S HOME: $3k → 12%SUPREME COUNCIL BENEVOLENT: $5k → 8%THE IRIS NETWORK: $2k → 7%PINE TREE SOC FOR CRIPPLED: $2k → 9%ALDERSGATE UNITED METHODIST CHUR: $2k → 11%THE MAINE CHILDREN'S HOME: $2k → 12%SUPREME COUNCIL BENEVOLENT: $3k → 8%THE IRIS NETWORK: $2k → 7%PINE TREE SOC FOR CRIPPLED: $2k → 9%ALDERSGATE UNITED METHODIST CHUR: $2k → 11%THE MAINE CHILDREN'S HOME: $2k → 12%MASONIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $145k → 7%MASONIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $9k → 7%MASONIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $9k → 7%MASONIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $7k → 7%MASONIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $6k → 7%MASONIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $6k → 7%MASONIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $5k → 7%MASONIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $3k → 7%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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$967k · 7 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
0

Total granted

$967k
$0

Still filing today

29%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time
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

  • SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN
    8× · 2017–2024 · $197k · revenue +120%
  • SC
    SUPREME COUNCIL BENEVOLENT
    8× · 2017–2024 · $194k
  • MC
    MASONIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $190k

Funded once

    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
    04the grantee network

    2 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. 2 of the 7 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)
    2/2
    Grantees still filing
    2/2
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    SUPREME COUNCIL BENEVOLENT: $194,226 · OtherSUPREME COUNCIL BENEVOLENTMASONIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $189,584 · OtherMASONIC CHARITABLE FOUNDATIONThe Iris Network: $96,609 · OtherThe Iris NetworkALDERSGATE UNITED METHODIST CHUR: $96,609 · OtherALDERSGATE UNITED METHODIST CHURPINE TREE SOC FOR CRIPPLED: $96,609 · OtherPINE TREE SOC FOR CRIPPLEDTHE MAINE CHILDREN'S HOME: $96,609 · OtherTHE MAINE CHILDREN'S HOMESHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN: $196,854 · HealthSHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR …
    Other$770,246Health$196,854

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

    25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN: $196,854 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetThe Iris Network: $96,609 over 8y, 2.3% 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 SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN ↗
    • Who funds The Iris Network ↗

    How much its grantees rely on government

    Each dot is one organization David Lewis Toothaker Char Tr funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from David Lewis Toothaker Char Tr. Bigger dots raise more.

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24
    no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
    • Shriners Hospitals for Children: 0% of 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 · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 7 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on David Lewis Toothaker Char Tr’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home