Skip to content
Dudley P & Barbara K Sheffler Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Dudley P & Barbara K Sheffler Foundation

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.

$151k
Granted FY2025still arriving
14
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Human Services$203kInternational$160kEducation$100kReligion$53kEmployment$20kHealth$13kFood & Nutrition$5kPublic Safety & Disaster$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $6k
  • $10k–50k12 grants · $145k
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
URBAN COMMUNITY SCHOOL$25,000
GILMOUR ACADEMY INC$15,000
ST MARTIN DE PORRES$15,000
KINNECT$10,000
TWO FOUNDATION$10,000
MEDWORKS$10,000
INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS IN MISSION$10,000
DIOCESAN COUNCIL OF TOLEDO SOCIETY OF ST$10,000
ST ALOYSIUS CHURCH$10,000
RESOURCE CLEVELAND$10,000
PARTNERSHIP SCHOOLS$10,000
THEA BOWMAN CENTER$10,000
CONSERVANCY FOR CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL$5,000
MERCY HOME FOR BOYS & GIRLS$500
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 (FY20–25, $202k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $5k → 14%RESOURCE CLEVELAND: $25k → 17%RESOURCE CLEVELAND: $10k → 17%SEEDS OF LITERACY: $5k → 17%REFUGEE RESPONSE: $63k → 17%REFUGEE RESPONSE: $40k → 17%REFUGEE RESPONSE: $10k → 17%REFUGEE RESPONSE: $5k → 17%KINNECT: $10k → 17%KINNECT: $10k → 17%THEA BOWMAN CENTER: $10k → 17%THEA BOWMAN CENTER: $5k → 17%THEA BOWMAN CENTER: $4k → 17%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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$504k · 10 repeat orgs$66k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue 0% since the first grant, against -6% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
9

Total granted

$504k
$35k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
-6%

Still filing today

70%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $31k 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
Human ServicesFood & NutritionPhilanthropyEmploymentEnvironmentOther
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

  • IP
    INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS IN MISSION
    6× · 2020–2025 · $160k
  • RC
    RESOURCE CLEVELAND
    6× · 2020–2025 · $153k · revenue +221%
  • UC
    URBAN COMMUNITY SCHOOL
    5× · 2021–2025 · $60k · revenue +0%

Funded once

  • DB
    DUDLEY BARBARA SHEFFLER FDN
    one grant, 2022 · $6k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $5k
  • EI
    ESPERANZA INC
    one grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue -44%
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
Global Cleveland

Global cleveland is dedicated to growing northeast ohio's economy by welcoming and connecting international people to opportunities and fostering a more inviting community for those seeking a place to call home.

Human Services
2
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
3
Greater Cleveland Volunteers

Greater cleveland volunteers enriches the community and indivuduals through volunteer service. volunteers age 18 and older are recruited and placed in the agency's programs or referred to local nonprofit or public organizations to help…

Philanthropy
4
Central Pennsylvania Food Bank

Our mission is to solve hunger in central pennsylvania by ensuring that everyone struggling with hunger has access to enough wholesome food every day. we will achieve this bold goal with the help of our generous donors, volunteers and…

Food & Nutrition
5
Cleveland Public Market Corporation

Cleveland public market corporations mission is to preserve the city's public market tradition while making the local food system more accessible, equitable, and diverse.

Community Improvement
6
Digitalc

Empower the people of greater cleveland to achieve success through technology, innovation and connected community.

Community Improvement
7
College Now Greater Cleveland Inc

College now's mission is to increase postsecondary educational attainment through college and career access advising, financial aid counseling and scholarship and retention services.

Education
8
Greater Columbus Chamber of Commerce

Advancing a thriving central ohio commmunity by serving as a catalyst for all businesses to grow and flourish. our mission pillars are connections, government relations, strategic business solutions and talent/workforce.

—
9
Toledo Northwestern Ohio Food Bank

To enable other community organizations to end hunger. we strive to maximize community resources by effectively obtaining and distributing food through a food collection and distribution system.

Food & Nutrition
10
United Way of Central Ohio Inc

United way of central ohio is the local organization that harnesses the power of communities working together - people, nonprofits, businesses and government - to create a stronger, more equitable central ohio. see schedule o.we do this…

Philanthropy
11
Akron-Canton Regional Foodbank

The mission of the akron-canton regional foodbank is to lead a collaborative network that empowers people to experience healthy and hunger-free lives. we distribute food to feed people and we advocate, engage and convene our community in…

Food & Nutrition
12
Freestore Foodbank Inc

Improve lives by eliminating hunger in partnership with our community.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Resource Cleveland; the most unlike its peers is International Partners in Mission. 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

14 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. 14 of the 23 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/14
Grantees still filing
5/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS IN MISSION: $160,000 · OtherINTERNATIONAL PARTNERS IN MISSIONURBAN COMMUNITY SCHOOL: $60,000 · OtherURBAN COMMUNITY SCHOOLST MARTIN DE PORRES: $25,000 · OtherST MARTIN DE PORRESST ALOYSIUS CHURCH: $15,000 · OtherGILMOUR ACADEMY INC: $15,000 · OtherMOBILEMED1 INC DBA MEDWORKS: $12,500 · Other+7 more: $30,549 · Other+7 moreRESOURCE CLEVELAND: $152,500 · Human ServicesRESOURCE CLEVELANDKINNECT: $20,000 · Human ServicesKINNECTTHEA BOWMAN CENTER: $19,000 · Human ServicesTHEA BOWMAN CENTER+2 more: $10,000 · Human ServicesPARTNERSHIP FOR INNER CITY EDUCATION DBA PARTNERSHIP SCHOOLS: $20,000 · PhilanthropyTWO FOUNDATION INC TWO CAFE & BOUTIQUE: $20,000 · EmploymentCONSERVANCY FOR CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK: $5,000 · EnvironmentGREATER CLEVELAND FOOD BANK INC: $2,500 · Food & NutritionFEED MORE INC: $2,500 · Food & Nutrition
Other$318,049Human Services$201,500Philanthropy$20,000Employment$20,000Environment$5,000Food & Nutrition$5,000

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 budgetINTERNATIONAL PARTNERS IN MISSION: $160,000 over 6y, 6.7% of budgetRESOURCE CLEVELAND: $152,500 over 6y, 3.4% of budgetURBAN COMMUNITY SCHOOL: $60,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetPARTNERSHIP FOR INNER CITY EDUCATION DBA PARTNERSHIP SCHOOLS: $20,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTWO FOUNDATION INC TWO CAFE & BOUTIQUE: $20,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetKINNECT: $20,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHEA BOWMAN CENTER: $19,000 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetMOBILEMED1 INC DBA MEDWORKS: $12,500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetESPERANZA INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSEEDS OF LITERACY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCONSERVANCY FOR CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGREATER CLEVELAND FOOD BANK INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFEED MORE INC: $2,500 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.

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 Cleveland Foundat…The Char and Chuck Fo…The Andrews FoundationHigley Fund of the Cl…Third Federal Foundat…The Reinberger Founda…The George Gund Found…Healthcomp FoundationDeaconess FoundationTreu Mart FundThe Abington Foundati…Murphy Family Foundat…
The Cleveland FoundationOH25.3× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Cleveland Foundation · The Char and Chuck Fowler Family Foundation · The Andrews Foundation · Higley Fund of the Cleveland Foundation · Third Federal Foundation · The Reinberger Foundation · The George Gund Foundation · Healthcomp Foundation · Deaconess Foundation · Treu Mart Fund · The Abington Foundation · Murphy Family 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 Dudley P & Barbara K Sheffler Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Dudley P & Barbara K Sheffler 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%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    10report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 23 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 Dudley P & Barbara K Sheffler’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