Skip to content

· Private foundation

Frank E Kaley Tuw-Kaley Fnd

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$187k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$47k
Largest
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Human Services$555kPublic Benefit$201kPublic Safety & Disaster$89kYouth Development$84kCommunity Improvement$80kEmployment$40kEducation$39kHousing & Shelter$39kOther$0
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $24k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $164k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$3.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SHARE OUTREACH INCORPORATED$46,500
ST JOSEPH COMMUNITY SERVICES$30,000
TOWN OF MILFORD$22,261
SOUHEGAN VALLEY BOYS & GIRLS CLUB$20,000
HARBOR HOMES INC$15,000
CATHOLIC CHARITIES NEW HAMPSHIRE$10,000
BRIDGES SUPPORT SERVICES INC$10,000
FIRST CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH$10,000
AMERICAN RED CROSS$7,500
BUILT ON ROCK FOUNDATION$6,500
MILFORD COMMUNITY ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION$5,000
MILFORD HISTORICAL SOCIETY$3,200
MILFORD SCHOOL DISTRICT$1,500
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 (FY17–25, $54k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 5%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 5%NH CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $10k → 7%NH CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $10k → 7%NH CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $10k → 7%CATHOLIC CHARITIES NEW HAMPSHIRE: $10k → 7%CATHOLIC CHARITIES NEW HAMPSHIRE: $10k → 7%NH CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $4k → 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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 15 repeat orgs$82k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +25% since the first grant, against +11% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
12

Total granted

$1.2M
$66k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+25%
+11%

Still filing today

60%
42%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $17k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Food & NutritionHuman ServicesPhilanthropyHousing & ShelterRecreation & SportsArts & CultureOther
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

  • SO
    SHARE OUTREACH INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $270k · revenue +80%
  • SJ
    ST JOSEPH COMMUNITY SERVICES DBA MEALS ON WHEELS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY
    8× · 2017–2025 · $185k · revenue +77%
  • BA
    BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SOUHEGAN VALLEY INC
    4× · 2017–2025 · $81k · revenue +58%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $17k
  • MI
    Milford Improvement Team
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue -98%
  • WL
    WADLEIGH LIBRARY
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
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
New Hampshire Children's Health Foundation
Health
2
Bank of New Hampshire Charitable Foundation
Philanthropy
3
Southern New Hampshire Health System Inc

Southern New Hampshire Health is dedicated to providing exceptional care that improves the health and well-being of individuals and communities we serve.

Health
4
Health Strategies of New Hampshire Inc
Health
5
New England Circle D/B/a Global Citizens Circle
Civil Rights
6
Monadnock Community Hospital

Monadnock Community Hospital is committed to improving the health and well-being of our community. We will elevate the health of our community by providing accessible, high quality and value based care.

Health
7
Portsmouth General Hospital Foundation
—
8
New England Center for Investigative Reporting Inc
—
9
Milford Health Care Services Inc
—
10
The Mental Health Center of Greater Manchester Inc

To provide mental health services for persons in the Greater Manchester, NH area.

—
11
Massachusetts Outdoor Heritage Foundation Inc Attn Susan Sacco
—
12
Home Health and Hospice Care

Home Health and Hospice Care provides trusted patient centered services that enhance each individual's independence and quality throughout life.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Milford Regional Counseling Services Inc; the most unlike its peers is Milford Historical Society. 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, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 29 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/15
Grantees still filing
10/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TOWN OF MILFORD: $197,765 · OtherTOWN OF MILFORDST JOSEPH COMMUNITY SERVICES DBA MEALS ON WHEELS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY: $184,500 · OtherST JOSEPH COMMUNITY SERVICES DBA MEALS ON WHEELS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTYBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SOUHEGAN VALLEY INC: $80,500 · OtherBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SOUHEGAN VALLEY INCMilford Thrives: $69,900 · OtherMilford ThrivesMILFORD AMBULANCE SERVICE: $54,714 · OtherMILFORD AMBULANCE SERVICEBRIDGES SUPPORT SERVICES INC: $41,800 · OtherAMERICAN RED CROSS: $34,690 · OtherMILFORD SCHOOL DISTRICT: $29,249 · Other+14 more: $122,186 · Other+14 moreSHARE OUTREACH INC: $269,500 · Food & NutritionSHARE OUTREACH INCNew Hampshire Catholic Charities: $53,500 · Human ServicesOPPORTUNITY NETWORKS INC: $40,000 · PhilanthropyHarbor Homes Inc: $39,000 · Housing & ShelterMILFORD COMMUNITY ATHLETIC ASS: $18,500 · Recreation & SportsMAKE-A-WISH OF NEW HAMPSHIRE INC: $3,000 · Arts & CultureDartmouth-Hitchcock Health: $2,000 · Health
Other$815,304Food & Nutrition$269,500Human Services$53,500Philanthropy$40,000Housing & Shelter$39,000Recreation & Sports$18,500Arts & Culture$3,000Health$2,000

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 budgetSHARE OUTREACH INC: $269,500 over 8y, 3.0% of budgetST JOSEPH COMMUNITY SERVICES DBA MEALS ON WHEELS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY: $184,500 over 8y, 0.6% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SOUHEGAN VALLEY INC: $80,500 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetMilford Thrives: $69,900 over 4y, 15% of budgetNew Hampshire Catholic Charities: $53,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetOPPORTUNITY NETWORKS INC: $40,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetHarbor Homes Inc: $39,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetMILFORD HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $25,550 over 5y, 27% of budgetMILFORD COMMUNITY ATHLETIC ASS: $18,500 over 3y, 5.7% of budgetMilford Improvement Team: $10,000 over 1y, 24% of budgetMILFORD REGIONAL COUNSELING SERVICES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetMAKE-A-WISH OF NEW HAMPSHIRE INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS NEW HAMPSHIRE INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDartmouth-Hitchcock Health: $2,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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 SHARE OUTREACH INC ↗
  • Who funds ST JOSEPH COMMUNITY SERVICES DBA MEALS ON WHEELS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SOUHEGAN VALLEY INC ↗
  • Who funds Milford Thrives ↗
  • Who funds New Hampshire Catholic Charities ↗
  • Who funds OPPORTUNITY NETWORKS INC ↗
  • Who funds Harbor Homes Inc ↗
  • Who funds MILFORD HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds MILFORD COMMUNITY ATHLETIC ASS ↗
  • Who funds Milford Improvement Team ↗
  • Who funds MILFORD REGIONAL COUNSELING SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds MAKE-A-WISH OF NEW HAMPSHIRE INC ↗
  • Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS NEW HAMPSHIRE INC ↗
  • Who funds FREE AND ACCEPTED MASONS OF NH ↗
  • Who funds Dartmouth-Hitchcock Health ↗

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.

New Hampshire Charitable FoundationNH24.8× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: New Hampshire Charitable Foundation · Eastern Bank Foundation · M L Billings Tr FBO Nh Charities · Arthur L Getz Charitable Tr · Milford Hospital Association · The Barker Foundation Inc · Ann de Nicola Tuw · Cogswell Benevolent Trust · Bangor Savings Bank Foundation · Peoples United Community Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc

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 Frank E Kaley Tuw-Kaley Fnd funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Frank E Kaley Tuw-Kaley Fnd. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%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
    2report 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 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 Frank E Kaley Tuw-Kaley Fnd’s filings →

    More from the funding graph