Skip to content

South Carolina · Private foundation

Edward a and Mary W Howes Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$4k
Granted FY2025(still arriving)
4
Grants FY2025
3
Organizations funded FY2024
33%
First-time grantees FY2024
Read the full brief
Median grant, FY2025
$1,109
Largest grant, FY2025
$2,500
Organizations funded a year
3 to 14
FY2018 to FY2024
States reached, FY2025
2
Total assets, FY2025
$82k
Applications
Takes unsolicited applications
Per its most recent filing; check its own site

How open it is to new grantees

In FY2024, 33% of the organizations Edward a and Mary W Howes Foundation funded were first-time grantees, receiving 13% of its grant dollars.

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Arts & CulturePhilanthropyAnimalsOther
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.
The numbers by year
Fiscal yearOrganizations fundedTo those organizationsFirst-time grantees
FY2025still arriving4$4k25%
FY20243$8k33%
FY20235$11k0%
FY20226$9k33%
FY20218$11k50%
FY20206$7k0%
FY201914$23k21%
FY201814$48k29%
88% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Arts & Culture$88kCommunity Improvement$37kEducation$7kPublic Benefit$6kHealth$6kReligion$4kAnimals$4kHuman Services$3kOther$0

Top grantees

Largest recipients by total granted, FY2017 to FY2025, and the share of each one’s budget the grants supplied at peak.

Show all 11 grantees
All grantees of Edward a and Mary W Howes Foundation by total granted
GranteeTotal grantedYearsShare of their budget
Midwest Lumber Museum Inc$78,639910%
Clinton Regional Development Corp$19,50031%
Suny New Paltz Foundation Inc$7,00040%
Hoover Presidential Foundation$5,00040%
Mercy Health Care Foundation$5,00013%
Wild Bird Fund Inc$4,00030%
Peace Center Foundation$2,50020%
New York Shakespeare Festival$2,50010%
Clinton County Historical Society$2,10061%
Clinton Art Association$7503n/a
Gateway Contemporary Ballet$3003n/a

Plus 18 recipients with no EIN on record ($37k), not named here.

Where it is load-bearing

Each grantee by its size and the share of its budget Edward a and Mary W Howes Foundation supplied at peak.

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMidwest Lumber Museum Inc: $78,639 over 9y, 9.7% of budgetClinton Regional Development Corp: $19,500 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetSuny New Paltz Foundation Inc: $7,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHoover Presidential Foundation: $5,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetMercy Health Care Foundation: $5,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetWild Bird Fund Inc: $4,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetPeace Center Foundation: $2,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNew York Shakespeare Festival: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetClinton County Historical Society: $2,100 over 6y, 0.7% of budget

Tap a dot to name the grantee.

How this is measured
Share of budget is the funder’s grant in a year over the grantee’s total revenue that year, at its highest across the years we hold; revenue is from all sources. Only grantees confirmed against their own filings, whose grants do not exceed their revenue, are plotted: the largest 9.

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.

Edith Curtis Armstrong and Florence E Curtis FoundationIL13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Edith Curtis Armstrong and Florence E Curtis Foundation · 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.

Compare Edward a and Mary W Howes Foundation with peer funders

About Edward a and Mary W Howes Foundation

How much does Edward a and Mary W Howes Foundation give?
Edward a and Mary W Howes Foundation reported 4 grants totaling $4,109 in its FY2025 IRS filing. It funded between 3 and 14 organizations a year over FY2018 to FY2024.
What does Edward a and Mary W Howes Foundation fund?
By grant dollars over FY2017 to FY2025, its largest causes are Arts & Culture (54%), Community Improvement (22%), Education (4%).
Who are Edward a and Mary W Howes Foundation's largest grantees?
By total granted over FY2017 to FY2025: Midwest Lumber Museum Inc ($79k), Clinton Regional Development Corp ($20k), Suny New Paltz Foundation Inc ($7k).
Does Edward a and Mary W Howes Foundation fund new organizations?
In FY2024, 33% of the organizations it funded were first-time grantees.
Does Edward a and Mary W Howes Foundation accept unsolicited applications?
Its most recent filing reports that it accepts unsolicited grant applications.
Which funders back the same organizations as Edward a and Mary W Howes Foundation?
Its strongest co-funders, measured against what their size predicts, include Edith Curtis Armstrong and Florence E Curtis Foundation, Amazonsmile Foundation.
Where is Edward a and Mary W Howes Foundation based?
Edward a and Mary W Howes Foundation is based in SC.

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 29 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 Edward a and Mary W Howes’ filings →

More from the funding graph