Skip to content
Ford S N & Ada Fund Pfdn at a glance

· Private foundation

Ford S N & Ada Fund Pfdn

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$649k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$347k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Health$1.7MHuman Services$1.6MEducation$712kPhilanthropy$445kRecreation & Sports$65kReligion$30kCommunity Improvement$20kHousing & Shelter$14kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $282k
  • $250k+1 grant · $347k
$72,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$15M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CATHOLIC CHARITIES$346,905
TAKING ROOT FARMS$100,000
MADISON LOCAL BOARD OF EDUCATION$72,000
RICHLAND COUNTY FOUNDATION$60,000
THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SHELTER INC$50,000
M1 CHURCH AND KIDS ACADEMY$20,000
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 (FY19–25, $1.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $374k → 17%CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $348k → 17%CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $313k → 17%TAKING ROOT FARMS: $100k → 15%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.
$3.5M · 9 repeat orgs$637k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +34% since the first grant, against +26% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
14

Total granted

$3.5M
$517k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+34%
+26%

Still filing today

67%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $120k 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
HealthHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsCommunity ImprovementReligionOther
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
    CATHOLIC CHARITIES CORPORATION
    3× · 2019–2021 · $1.0M · revenue +19%
  • NC
    NORTH CENTRAL STATE COLLEGE FOUNDATION
    4× · 2020–2024 · $328k · revenue +34%
  • AC
    AKRON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION
    2× · 2022–2023 · $150k · revenue +45%

Funded once

  • OC
    OHIOHEALTH CORPORATION
    one grant, 2023 · $100k
  • TS
    THIRD STREET FAMILY HEALTH SVCS
    one grant, 2020 · $95k
  • TS
    THIRD STREET CLINIC
    one grant, 2022 · $83k · revenue -48% · 95% of their budget
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
Redlands Community Hospital

Our mission is to promote an environment where members of our community can receive high quality care and services so they can maintain and be restored to good health.

Health
2
Richland Care Center Inc

The organization provides 24 hour oversight and nursing care and aims to maintain each resident at their maximum level of function, provide a home-like atmosphere of caring and respect, and accommodate individual differences to the extent…

Health
3
Rural Health Care Inc

To provide comprehensive primary health care and preventative health services to underserved communities. to serve individuals regardless of their ability to pay.

Health
4
Richland Medical Center D/B/a Central Ozarks Medical Center

Dedicated to providing the highest quality medical services within our power to provide to the people of camden, pulaski, laclede, and miller counties

—
5
Community Health Center of Richmond Inc

The organization's mission is to sustain a vibrant, healthy and strong community through affordable, culturally competent, quality primary health care.

Health
6
Fordland Clinic Inc

To improve the health of our wider rural community and to serve as the independent provider of choice by offering comprehensive healthcare services to all area residents without regard to insurance or income.

Health
7
Family Health Center of Marshfield Inc

The mission of family health center of marshfield, inc. is to provide access to high quality health care services for the underserved and to enhance the health of our communities.

Health
8
Raphael Health Center Inc

To provide community-based, full-service healthcare of the highest quality with respect and dignity for all people including the underserved and uninsured within a setting that shares the love and healing of jesus christ.

Health
9
Rumford Hospital

To provide exceptional healthcare services in a safe and trustfulenvironment through the expertise, commitment and compassion of ourfamily of caregivers.

Health
10
Columbiana County Mental Health Clinic

The mission of the columbiana county mental health clinic is to improve the lives of individuals and families by meeting the behavioral health needs of our community. this is accomplished through: 1) excellent customer service, 2)…

—
11
Riggs Community Health Center Inc

Providing primary health care to low-income residents.

Health
12
Rhs Corp

Our mission is to promote an environment where members of our community can receive high quality care and services so they can maintain and be restored to good health.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Center for Individual and Family Services Inc; the most unlike its peers is Rubies Womens Group 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

15 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. 15 of the 26 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
11/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $1,447,329 · OtherCATHOLIC CHARITIESMADISON LOCAL BOARD OF EDUCATION: $331,450 · OtherMADISON LOCAL BOARD OF EDUCATIONNORTH CENTRAL STATE COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $328,154 · OtherNORTH CENTRAL STATE COLLEGE FOUNDATIONTHE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SHELTER INC: $100,000 · OtherOHIOHEALTH CORPORATION: $100,000 · OtherTHIRD STREET FAMILY HEALTH SVCS: $95,000 · Other+9 more: $156,137 · Other+9 moreCATHOLIC CHARITIES CORPORATION: $1,035,000 · Human ServicesCATHOLIC CHARITIES CORPORATI…TAKING ROOT FARMS INC: $100,000 · Human ServicesTAKING ROOT FARMS INCRICHLAND COUNTY FOUNDATION: $445,232 · PhilanthropyRICHLAND CO…AKRON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $150,000 · HealthTHIRD STREET CLINIC: $82,500 · HealthFAMILY LIFE COUNSELING & PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES: $54,574 · HealthTHE CENTER FOR INDIVIDUAL AND FAMILY SERVICES INC: $50,000 · Health+1 more: $5,000 · HealthTHE FRIENDLY HOUSE ASSOCIATION OF MANSFIELD OHIO: $64,573 · Recreation & SportsRICHLAND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GROUP INC: $20,000 · Community ImprovementRUBIES WOMENS GROUP INC: $2,500 · Religion
Other$2,558,070Human Services$1,135,000Philanthropy$445,232Health$342,074Recreation & Sports$64,573Community Improvement$20,000Religion$2,500

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 budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES CORPORATION: $1,035,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetRICHLAND COUNTY FOUNDATION: $445,232 over 6y, 1.9% of budgetNORTH CENTRAL STATE COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $328,154 over 4y, 13% of budgetAKRON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $150,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetTAKING ROOT FARMS INC: $100,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetTHE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SHELTER INC: $100,000 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetTHIRD STREET CLINIC: $82,500 over 1y, 95% of budgetTHE FRIENDLY HOUSE ASSOCIATION OF MANSFIELD OHIO: $64,573 over 4y, 1.9% of budgetFAMILY LIFE COUNSELING & PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES: $54,574 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR INDIVIDUAL AND FAMILY SERVICES INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetThird Street Community Clinic: $42,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetRICHLAND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GROUP INC: $20,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetHOSPICE OF NORTH CENTRAL OHIO INC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetRonald McDonald House Global: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRUBIES WOMENS GROUP INC: $2,500 over 1y, 1.9% 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.

Richland County Found…Ashland County Commun…The Milliron Foundati…The Hire Family Found…The Robert and Esther…Mightycause Charitabl…Columbus FoundationEdith B & Joseph E Hu…The Milton R & Beulah…Gorman Family Foundat…Shelby Ohio Community…United Way of Richlan…
Richland County FoundationOH24.2× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Richland County Foundation · Ashland County Community Foundation · The Milliron Foundation · The Hire Family Foundation · The Robert and Esther Black Family Foundation · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Columbus Foundation · Edith B & Joseph E Humphrey Family Foundation · The Milton R & Beulah M Young Foundation · Gorman Family Foundation · Shelby Ohio Community Foundation of Richland County · United Way of Richland County

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 Ford S N & Ada Fund Pfdn funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ford S N & Ada Fund Pfdn. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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 26 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 Ford S N & Ada Fund Pfdn’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